: '-Wits ** v ^ 'SK* ♦* v f 



6 ^ v 





^ >%2ttfc:.^.> ^.iiS^V 




.0* . 





r :, Sk* . ** v ^ - '-W&s . ** v 





**** 





by 



AT 



* -WR* /%. '*iK- ** v % : $j(J 




§j8^ ^ * ^^^^ 



f.. V^*> V*^V V^-V s 

•Jfe- w .ifiM«:- v t / .afe. %„yy J M* 




0* > 




a ... 










t 



OP 

THE TRIAL 

OF 

THE REV. THEODORE CLAPP, 

i 

BEFORE 

THE MISSISSIPPI PRESBYTERY, 

AT THEIR SESSIONS 

IN MAY AND DECEMBER 

1832. 



Parturient montes, nascetur ridicuius mus, 
duos Deus vult perdere, prius dementat. 



Nefcu <& cleans ; 

PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY HOTCHKISS & CO. 



1833, 




i 



PREFACE. 



Dr. Channing, in a Sermon preached at the annual elec- 
tion in Boston, May 26th, 1830, delivered the follow- 
ing eloquent and appropriate sentiments on the subject 
of Religious Liberty. 

" In order that religion should yield its fall and 
44 best fruits, one thing is necessary ; and the times 
<f require that I should state it with great distinctness. 
V It is necessary that religion should be held and pro- 
44 fessed in a liberal spirit. Just as far as it assumes 
" an intolerant, exclusive, sectarian form, it subverts, 
"instead of strengthening, the soul's freedom, and 
44 becomes the heaviest and most galling yoke which 
44 is laid on the intellect and conscience. Religion 
" must be viewed, not as a monopoly of priests, mi- 
" nisters, or sects ; not as conferring on any man a 
44 right to dictate to his fellow-beings ; not as an in- 
44 strument by which the few may awe the many ; not 
" as bestowing on one a prerogative which is not 
" enjoyed by all ; but as the property of every human 
" being, and as the great subject for every human 
44 mind. It must be regarded as the revelation of a 
44 common Father, to whom all have equal access ; 
44 who invites all to the like immediate communion, 
" who has no favourites, who has appointed no infalii- 
" ble expounders of his will a who opens his works 



I 



iv 



PREFACE. 



" and word to every eye, and calls upon all to read 
44 for themselves, and to follow fearlessly the best 
" convictions of their own understandings. Let re- 
44 ligion be seized on by individuals or sects, as their 
" special province ; let them clothe themselves with 
" God's prerogative of judgment ; let them succeed 
" in enforcing their creed by penalties of law, or pe- 
nalties of opinion; let them succeed in fixing a 
44 brand on virtuous men, whose only crime is free 
" investigation ; and religion becomes the most 
" blighting tyranny which can establish itself over 
" the human mind. You have all heard of the out- 
" ward evils which religion, when thus turned into 
" tyranny, has inflicted ; how it has dug dreary dun- 
44 geons, kindled fires for the martyr, and invented 
44 instruments of exquisite torture. But to me all 
44 this is less fearful than its influence over the mind. 
44 When I see the superstitions which it has fastened 
44 on the conscience, the spiritual terrors with which 
44 it has haunted and subdued the ignorant and sus- 
44 ceptible, the dark and appalling views of God 
44 which it has spread far and wide, the dread of in- 
44 quiry which it has struck into superior understand- 
" ings, and the servility which it has made to pass 
44 for piety— when 1 see all this, the fire, the scaffold, 
44 and the outward inquisition, terrible as they are, 
« seem to me inferior evils. I look with a solemn 
44 joy on the heroic spirits who have met freely and 
" fearlessly pain and death in the cause of truth and 
" human rights. But there are other victims of in- 
" tolerance, on whom I look with unmixed sorrow. 
44 They are those who, spell-bound by early prejudice, 
44 or by intimidations from the pulpit and the press, 



PREFACE. 



V 



" dare not think ; who anxiously stifle every doubt or 
" misgiving in regard to their opinions, as if to doubt 
" were a crime ; who shrink from the seekers after 
" truth as from infection, who deny all virtue which 
" does not wear the livery of their own sect, who sur- 
" render to others their best powers, receive unresist- 
" ingly a teaching which wars against reason and 
" conscience, and who think it a merit to impose on 
" such as live within their influence the grievous 
" bondage which they bear themselves. How much 
" to be deplored is it, that religion, the very principle 
" which is designed to raise men above the judgment 
" and the power of man, should become the chief in- 
" strument of usurpation over the soul." 

" It is said that in this country, where the rights 
" of private judgment, and of speaking and writing 
" according to our convictions, are guarantied with 
" every solemnity by institutions and laws, religion 
" can never degenerate into tyranny ; that here its 
" whole influence must conspire to the liberation and 
" dignity of the mind. I answer, we discover little 
" knowledge of human nature if we ascribe to con- 
" stitutions the power of charming to sleep the spi- 
" rit of intolerance and exclusion. Almost every 
" other bad passion may sooner be put to rest; and 
" for this plain reason, that intolerance always shel- 
" ters itself under the name and garb of religious 
" zeal. Because we live in a country where the 
" gross outward, visible chain is broken, we must not 
" conclude that we are necessarily free. There are 
" chains not made of iron, which eat more deeply 
" into the soul. An espionage of bigotry may as ef- 
" fectually close our lips and chill our hearts as an 



VI 



PREFACE. 



" armed and hundred-eyed police. There are count- 
" less ways by which men in a free country may en- 
" croach on their neighbours' rights. In religion, the 
" instrument is ready made and always at hand. I 
" refer to opinion, combined and organized in sects, 
<4 and swayed by the clergy. We say we have no 
" Inquisition. But a sect skilfully organized, trained 
" to utter one cry, combined to cover with reproach 
" whoever may differ from themselves, to drown the 
* free expression of opinion by denunciations of he- 
" resy, and to strike terror into the multitude by joint 
" and perpetual menace — such a sect is as perilous 
" and palsying to the intellect as the Inquisition. It 
" serves the minister as effectually as the sword. 
" The present age is notoriously sectarian, and there- 
" fore hostile to liberty. One of the strongest fea- 
" tures of our times is the tendency of men to run 
" into associations, to lose themselves in masses, to 
u think and act in crowds, to act from the excitement 
" of numbers, to sacrifice individuality, to identify 
u themselves with parties and sects. At such a pe- 
" riod we ought to fear, and cannot too much dread, 
w lest a host should be marshalled under some sec- 
« tarian standard, so numerous and so strong as to 
<; overawe opinion, stifle inquiry, compel dissenters 
" to a prudent silence, and thus accomplish the end^ 
" without incurring the odium of penal laws. We 
" have, indeed, no small protection against this evil 
" in the multiplicity of sects. But let us not forget 
" that coalitions are as practicable and as perilous 
" in church as state ; and that minor differences, as 
" they are called, may be sunk, for the purpose of 
" joint exertion, against a common foe. Happily, 



PREFACE. 



vii 



44 the spirit of this people, in spite of all narrowing 
"influences, is essentially liberal. Here lies our 
" safety. The liberal spirit of the people, I trust, is 
" more and more to temper and curb that exclusive 
" spirit which is the besetting sin of their religious 
" guides." 

These views of an author pre-eminently great, who 
has done more for the cause of pure Christianity with 
his pen than any other American, and who, what- 
ever may now be thought of him by the cold, narrow 3 
blind sectarian, will occupy a higher place in the 
judgment of succeeding generations than any of his 
illustrious contemporaries, have been solemnly de- 
clared, by certain persons who sit on the chief seats 
in the synagogues, to be uncharitable, bigoted, and 
false. The following pages will show that this criti- 
cism is not just ; that there are now individuals in this 
land who "clothe themselves with God's prerogative 
" of judgment, and are endeavouring to enforce their 
44 creed by the penalties of opinion, and by fixing a 
" brand on virtuous men, whose only crime is free in- 
44 vestigation." 

When Mr. Clapp first visited New Orleans, eleven 
years ago, in compliance with an invitation tendered 
by the trustees of the First Presbyterian church in 
that city, and before he had preached his first dis- 
course, he was told that the communicants of said 
church had formed a coalition to prevent, if possible, 
his being settled in the vacancy occasioned by the 
death of the Rev. Sylvester Larned. On inquiry it 
was ascertained that the communicants had been 
induced to adopt this course by certain unfavourable 



viii 



PREFACE. 



statements concerning Mr. Clapp's theology coming 
from some clergyman who had resided in the West- 
ern States. All efforts to find out his name proved 
fruitless. The communicants were, however, per- 
suaded to lay aside their prejudices for a season, till 
they might have an opportunity to learn from Mr. 
Clapp's conversation and preaching whether he was 
heretical or orthodox. There is an entrance to Mr. 
Clapp's pulpit from a recess or vestry-room imme- 
diately in the rear of it. At the close of divine ser- 
vice, Mr. C. usually retires from the desk directly into 
this recess or vestry. After the morning services 
of the third sabbath that Mr. Clapp spent in New 
Orleans, he was surprised to find in his recess a cler- 
gyman whom he had very superficially known in 
Kentucky. This clergyman was educated at the 
Princeton Theological Seminary, New Jersey. He 
presented himself to Mr. Clapp in the attitude of 
kneeling. His face was bedewed with tears. He 
took Mr. C. by the hand, and spoke nearly as follows : 
" Mr. Clapp, I appear in this place to confess that I 
" have misrepresented and slandered you. 1 am the 
44 author of the unfavourable rumours which have been 
44 circulated in New Orleans with respect to your 
44 theological views and ministerial character. From 
44 your denying the doctrine of the imputation of 
44 Adam's sin to his posterity, in a conversation which 
44 1 had with you in Louisville, Kentucky, 1 inferred 
44 that you were a latitudinarian. Being in this city 
44 for my health, and hearing that you were weekly 
4C expected here, I did all in my power^ to prejudice 
44 the minds of Mr. Larned's church against you. I 
u told them that you were a heretic, and that you 



PREFACE. 



IX 



rt were not a pious man. 1 did wickedly in making 
" these assertions. They were not based on a suf- 
" ficiently ample knowledge of your creed and cha- 
" racter. I was mistaken. You have preached the 
" best sermon this morning which I have ever heard 
" on the subject of repentance. I believe that God 
" has sent you to New Orleans. Forgive my pre- 
" cipitate, foolish, and unjustifiable conduct towards 
" you." 

This anecdote will serve to show the candid, in- 
telligent reader, the true origin of the defamatory 
reports so widely disseminated against Mr. Clapp. 
They were first set afloat by young ministers from 
Princeton Theological Seminary, who reprobate the 
theology of the North, and who do not hesitate to 
employ the vilest slander to depress and ruin the 
young clergymen from New-England, who come to 
these Southern and Western States. The Prince- 
tonian parsons seem determined to take possession 
of the Mississippi valley. They pretend to a loftier 
piety than that possessed by the purest ministers in 
the Northern States. They are distinguished for a 
sanctimonious air, a holy gloom, an evangelical 
sedateness of countenance, which is acquired by long 
practice and painful discipline at the Seminary. 
The tones of their voices are sepulchral and unearth- 
ly. In their discourses, words flow with artificial 
slowness, and every period ends with a pious cadence. 
In their ordinary gait and movements there is an 
air which indicates a consciousness that they are 
" clothed with God's prerogative of judgment," and 
are the peculiar favourites of Heaven. They decide 
" ex cathedra" upon all points of controversial theo- 

2 



X 



PREFACE. 



logy, and pronounce all those who dare to dissent 
from them in opinion, to have lost their erect pos- 
ture, and to be gliding insensibly down the declivity 
to dangerous heresy and hopeless ungodliness. They 
express a much stronger attachment to the Presby- 
terian Catechisms and Confessions of Faith than to 
the volume of Inspired Truth. On a certain occa- 
sion, one of this class seriously advised Mr. Clapp 
to make the Confession of Faith his text-book and 
standard of truth in his public discourses. These 
remarks are not applicable to all the young clergy- 
men in the valley of the Mississippi from Princeton. 
Many of them do not adopt the peculiarities above- 
mentioned; are as frank, intelligent, open-hearted, 
and liberal teachers of the gospel as one could wish 
to see or converse with. 

The publication of the following pages cannot, it 
is believed, fail to convince the great majority of the 
inhabitants of Louisiana and Mississippi that there 
is among them a class of ministers, directing like a 
machine, a small band of satellites organized into a 
sect, trained to the detestable employment of perse- 
cution, and regularly employed in endeavouring to 
overwhelm with obloquy and detraction every minis- 
ter who ventures fearlessly to preach the Bible with- 
out any regard to human standards. The Louisi- 
anians and Mississippians are ardently attached to re- 
ligious liberty, are uncommonly intelligent, and cling 
with all their hearts to the immortal hopes and ever- 
lasting truths of Christianity. No people have been 
more traduced than they, and by ministers who have 
come among them from the Northern and Middle 
States, and by itinerant pedlars or merchandizes. 



PREFACE. 



xi 



The perusal of Mr. Clapp's trial will show them their 
danger, will dissipate the mist in which their enemies 
have endeavoured to conceal their nefarious designs, 
cause them to combine their forces, and to move for- 
ward in one unbroken phalanx to discomfit the ar- 
mies of bigotry ; to establish and build up the empire 
of reason and pure religion on the banks of the great 
Father of waters. This winter past the city of 
New Orleans has been infested with an organized 
band of robbers and burglarers, who have come from 
abroad. Almost every house in the city has been 
broken open and plundered in the dead hour of 
night. These depredators have caused us much 
alarm and distress. We are many thousands the 
poorer on account of their ravages. We dare not 
lie down to sleep at night, except upon our arms ; 
and we are often aroused from our slumbers by the 
noise of thieves and house-breakers attempting to 
burst open our doors or windows. But this class of 
nuisances is by no means so formidable and pesti- 
ferous as those clerical villains and lay-brethren, in 
the character of spies, who prowl among us in the 
winter for prey, and in the summer visit the conven- 
ticles at the North, and move to weeping the sym- 
pathies of the good people there by doleful pictures 
of the moral abominations that sweep over the fer- 
tile districts of Louisiana and Mississippi. The 
persons alluded to are calumniators. They know 
comparatively nothing about the state of religion in 
these parts. What little they do know, they are in- 
capable of describing correctly ; yet they give their 
opinions with as much confidence as if their infor- 
mation on the subject was thorough and correct 



xii 



PREFACE. 



Some of these itinerant parsons and pedlars were 
relied on by the Presbytery to give testimony against 
Mr. Clapp. 

Mr. Clapp did not enjoy the benefit of a fair and 
impartial trial. The witnesses summoned to testify 
against him were his notorious enemies. Their evi- 
dence, generally, relates to particular conversations 
with the accused in private, when no third person was 
present j and of course its falsity cannot be made to 
appear by contradictory testimony. Mr. C. was re- 
fused the privilege of proving the soundness of his 
faith by Sacred Writ, the only standard of truth re- 
cognized among protestants. He was told that the 
unanimous declaration of an hundred unexception- 
able witnesses — regular members of his church and 
congregation, that they had never heard him avow 
and teach a particular doctrine, but had always heard 
him deny it, was insufficient to invalidate the contra- 
ry declaration, though made but hy one of Mr. Clapp's 
enemies, and one who had not been a regular at- 
tendant on his preaching. Mr. Clapp prayed to have 
his trial prolonged, till several of his most important 
witnesses had returned from their summer excur- 
sions. This favour was denied. Mr. Clapp, on ac- 
count of sickness in his family, was obliged to be 
absent from an adjourned meeting of the Presbyte- 
ry in July last. This absence was represented as a 
crime, and Mr. Clapp was suspended from the mi- 
nistry for the heinous sin of contempt of court. 
When the Presbytery were examining the witnesses 
unfriendly to the accused, they would not write down 
without delay the identical answers given by said 
witnesses to the several questions propounded ; but 



PREFACE. 



xiii 



they would direct the clerk3 to refrain from record- 
ing the answers till they had suggested to the wit- 
nesses the propriety of making some alterations in 
their testimony. This was a common occurrence. 
In some cases a witness's testimony was written 
over half a dozen times, and each time materially 
altered, and made to assume an aspect more dark 
and hostile to the accused. In re-writing and re- 
modelling one answer, the Presbytery occupied more 
than thirty minutes by the watch, and the last shape 
in which it was presented bore scarcely a trace of 
resemblance to the original. These, and many other 
circumstances, which it would be tiresome to nar- 
rate, will convince an impartial public that the body 
before which Mr. Clapp was tried, was as unfair, 
unjust, and merciless, as any of those ecclesiastical 
tribunals that formerly held their sittings in the dark 
chambers of the Inquisition. 

Mr. Clapp's defence, pronounced in Pine Ridge 
church, Adams county, Mississippi, was, strictly 
speaking, an extemporaneous effort. His public dis- 
courses are never written till after their delivery. 
His defence has been committed to paper since the 
termination of the trial ; but such are the habits of 
the accused, that he is able, many months after the 
delivery of a discourse, to record it in the same or- 
der, and nearly in the same diction, in which it was 
originally presented. It is presumed that if the mem- 
bers of the Mississippi Presbytery deign to read Mr. 
Clapp's defence, they will be satisfied that the fol- 
lowing is a faithful report of it. 

When the sentence of the Presbytery was an- 
nounced to Mr. Clapp, the Moderator assured him 



xiv 



PREFACE. 



that he should be furnished with a copy of the whole 
proceedings in as short a time as possible. This 
promise, made in the most explicit and solemn man- 
ner, was strangely violated. The copy was withheld 
till the Presbytery had time to prepare and publish 
what they style, " Reasons for the Decision of the 
" Mississippi Presbytery in the case of Mr. Theo- 
" dore Clapp." This is a purely ex-parte publication, 
made up of sheer falsehood, misstatements as to facts, 
sophistical reasonings, and garbled mutilated quota- 
tions from the testimony and documents adduced on 
Mr. Clapp's trial. The real object of this unseason- 
able and unjustifiable publication was to forestall 
the judgment of the public, and to put off for a time, 
if possible, that overwhelming, appalling sentence 
of condemnation which is yet to be pronounced by 
an enlightened community, and which is destined 
to prostrate forever the unrighteous judges of Mr. 
Clapp. It is believed that no Presbytery in the 
United States ever before had the moral turpitude, 
the hardihood, the utter recklessness of justice, 
evinced by the Mississippi Presbytery in attempting 
to palm upon the public a paltry pamphlet of some 
twenty pages as a fair exhibition of Mr. Clapp's tri- 
al ; a true report of which, together with his defence, 
could not be contained in a less space than that of 
an octavo volume of from three hundred and fifty to 
four hundred pages. Like Haman of old, by issuing 
that tract they have erected a gibbet on which they 
will, by and by, make a feeble expiation for their 
multifarious and extraordinary crimes. 



New Orleans, April 2d, 1833. 



THE 

DEFENCE 

OF 

THEODORE CLAPP; 

Delivered before the Mississippi Presbytery during their ses- 
sion at Pine Ridge church, Adams county, 
Mississippi, December, 1832. 



"I think myself happy," moderator, in having an opportu- 
nity " to answer for myself, this day, touching all the charges" 
which have been brought against me by this respectable, 
learned, and pious judicatory. I bless God for the prospect 
of a final decision concerning the difficulties subsisting be- 
tween us ; because such an event is likely, as I think, to con- 
tribute both to the prosperity of the church in these parts, and 
to my personal advantage. 

Your attention, in the first place, is solicited to some gene- 
ral observations preparatory to a particular examination of 
the testimony and documents adduced to substantiate the 
charges for which I am now arraigned. If I understand the 
language which has fallen from several of my brethren during 
the progress of this trial, they seem to have always regarded 
me as a stranger among them ; a thief, or a robber, who en- 
tered not by the legitimate door into the sheepfold — the pres- 
byterian church ; but who clambered up some other way / who 
thrust himself among you under the sacred garb of ortho- 
doxy and sanctity to do the work of destruction only, — to steal, 
and to kill, and to devour. Are those of you who regard me 
under such an unfavourable aspect qualified to sit on the 



bench of my judges ? Should you not decline giving a deci- 
sion, which, however pure may be your motives, must neces- 
sarily receive a colouring — a bias from your pre-conceived 
opinions and prejudices ? 

Very often, when reflecting on the difficulties that have oc- 
curred between the Mississippi presbytery and myself, I have 
been inclined to regret my ever having formed a connexion 
with your body ; but on such occasions I have checked the 
nascent emotion of sorrow, because it seemed to me like mur- 
muring or repining at a dispensation of Providence. Am I 
wrong, moderator, in regarding my introduction into your 
judicatory as a divine appointment ? Do we not read that 
the hairs of our head are all numbered ? Are not the power, 
wisdom, and goodness of our Heavenly Father concerned in 
all the changes, successes, events, losses, and trials, which 
befall the children of men ? I remember the inducements 
which led me originally to visit New Orleans. The trustees 
of the church founded by my illustrious predecessor, the Rev. 
Sylvester Larned, invited me to become his successor in the 
year 1821. Believing myself incompetent to fill a station so 
elevated and responsible, I wrote to the trustees, thanking 
them for the good opinion which they seemed to entertain of 
my character and qualifications ; but assuring them, at the 
same time, that I must absolutely decline the office which 
they had so kindly and respectfully proffered. Not many 
weeks after I received a second letter from the trustees, re- 
peating their former invitation, and alleging that the church 
was on the very verge of annihilation ; from which nothing to 
human view could save them but the immediate settlement 
of a pastor. The same letter stated, that after reiterated ap- 
plications to Northern clergymen for assistance, all of which 
had been in vain, their only remaining hope was that some 
individual residing in the valley of Mississippi might be per- 
suaded to come to their rescue, and save them from threat- 
ened extinction. On the receipt of this letter I consulted 
with my friends in Louisville, where I was then stationed, as 
to the path of my duty. They unanimously advised me to 
visit New Orleans without delay. Their advice was followed. 



3 



I descended the river with a heavy heart and most gloomy 
anticipations. At that time I should have preferred a settle- 
ment in any of the domestic or foreign missionary stations to 
one on the banks of the lower Mississippi. In taking a retro- 
spect of the above-mentioned period and circumstances, I can- 
not but feel that my settlement in New Orleans was the ap- 
pointment of Heaven. I remember too distinctly the conside- 
rations which led me to apply for admission into your body. 
They were briefly these. The church in which I labour was 
originally organized (in accordance with an act of incorpora- 
tion passed by the legislature of Louisiana) on the plan of doc- 
trine, government, and discipline, adopted by the General As- 
sembly of the Presbyterian Church in the United States. Se- 
veral of the prominent communicants in the church, when I 
first visited New Orleans, expressed a decided predilection 
for the Presbyterian sect. I wished to gratify them in this 
particular. In addition to these inducements, I was anxious 
to join your body in order to secure to myself the benefits of 
your counsels, patronage, and co-operation. I felt it to be an 
imperative duty on my part to make every endeavour to pro- 
mote the peace and union of the few ministers of the Chris- 
tian religion that are dispersed over this new, frontier, widely 
extended, and unspeakably important, district of our Ameri- 
can Zion. 

Such, in general, were the motives which led me to solicit 
an admission into your body, not personally, but by a letter, 
which was carried and communicated to you by Mr. Wil- 
liam Ross, who was subsequently an elder in our church. In 
that letter I stated with explicitness, that, as to my theology, I 
was substantially with the Theological Seminary at Andover, 
Massachusetts, and the congregational churches generally 
called orthodox throughout New England. 

Your motives, moderator, in granting the above-mentioned 
request, were, I doubt not, in every respect vindicable. 

I am constrained, then, to refer the solemn relation by 
which we are united to the appointment of Heaven — to the 
foreordination of God, to whom are known all his works from 
the beginning. It is our privilege, therefore, to hope and 

3 



4 



pray that these difficulties, vexatious and grievous as they un- 
doubtedly have been both to you and me, will be so over- 
ruled as to promote the cause of our blessed Master in this 
fair and fertile section of our beloved land. Yes, moderator, 
we may indulge the consolatory thought, that if it be our hap- 
py destination beyond the boundaries of mortality and time, 
to look back upon our earthly career from the mansions of 
everlasting bliss, we shall then be enabled to view this con- 
troversy with other optics than those with which we now re- 
gard it. In a brighter and better world we may see how this 
trial, under the inscrutable government of the Most High, 
yielded the peaceable fruits of righteousness ; subserved the 
interests of truth and virtue ; and furthered the salvation of 
immortal souls. And, to do justice to my own feelings I must 
add, that, in the consequences of the relation formed between 
us near a dozen years ago, there is to my eye much of con- 
fusion, darkness, and evil. This confusion God can reduce 
to order. Upon this darkness He can pour light. From this 
evil He is competent to educe good. Permit me on this so- 
lemn occasion to assure you, moderator, that with an in- 
creasingly strong and unfailing trust do I now repose on the 
omnipotent arm of Him who made heaven and earth, with 
the supporting assurance that He will vindicate my cause ; 
that He will condescend in infinite mercy to scatter the cloud 
of calumny that has darkened my character, and present it 
again to the public eye, after a temporary eclipse, as fair and 
luminous as it was before its obscuration. At any rate, Sir, I 
hope the considerations now suggested will convince my bre- 
thren, that I first came among them with pure and honour- 
able motives ; that therefore they should not look upon me 
in the light of an intruder or interloper, but as a legitimate 
and constituent part of the same ecclesiastical community to 
which they belong ; entitled to the same attention, civilities, 
and kindness, which would be paid me had I drawn my first 
breath within the pale of your denomination, or could I trace 
up my genealogy to John Calvin, John Knox, or to any other 
celebrated father of Presbyterianism. 

Moderator, criminations and recriminations have been very 



5 



rife within the bounds of the Presbyterian church during the 
last year and the one preceding that. Ministers of the gos- 
pel, venerable, and (I might add) venerated for their talents, 
both native and acquired ; for their long-standing in the 
church ; beloved for their piety, their amiable, pure, and ex- 
emplary lives ; have been assailed privately and publicly on 
the floors of Presbyteries, Synods, and the General Assem- 
bly, in the columns of the religious gazette ; and that too with 
a coarseness, a vulgarness of invective, vituperation, and 
abuse, which even those graceless gladiators would be 
ashamed to use who contend for superiority on the unhal- 
lowed arena of political ambition. Perhaps, then, it should 
not excite surprise that the accused should be denounced as 
an heretic and a liar, though in fact he has not wandered into 
the field either of heresy or immorality. To what cause or 
causes may we ascribe this unhappy state of things in our 
church ? We must look for its origin, Lthink, partly in that 
spirit of ecclesiastical ambition, which, in every age of the 
church, has in a greater or less degree marred its loveliness 
and impeded its advancement, and partly in an honest diffe- 
rence of opinion about non-essential points of faith or prac- 
tice. Now, Sir, though I do not presume to class myself with 
the great and good men above-named, nor with the great and 
good of former generations, who, ever since the time of our 
Saviour, have been reviled, and against whom all manner of 
evil has been said falsely, and who have been called to make 
their way against the strong tide of popular prejudice and 
the stormy winds of persecuting clamour; though I can 
hardly venture to lay in a claim to the lowest and humblest 
place in the church of Christ, yet I cannot dispossess myself 
of the consolatory belief that all my difficulties with you have 
originated in the simple fact, that the theology of the Andover 
school does not square exactly with that of Princeton. Mo- 
derator, I appeal to your candour and good sense for the 
truth of the above suggestion. Imagine my ministerial ca- 
reer in New Orleans to have differed from what it actually 
has been in this particular only, that in all my private and 
public showings as to doctrine I had adhered uniformly to 



6 



what you consider the most perfect standard of orthodoxy 5 
suppose that I had always spoken and preached as you think 
a sound, old-fashioned, thorough-going Calvinist should speak 
and preach ; in that case do you believe there would have 
been any controversy between this Presbytery and the ac- 
cused ? From other quarters attacks might have been made 
upon me, but you would have been my defenders. However 
numerous, talented, or influential, might have been my op- 
posers, you would have come forward, with united heart and 
hand, in one unbroken phalanx to my support ; you would, 
if possible, have rolled back the tide of opposition ; you would 
have thrown over me the segis of your ecclesiastical autho- 
rity ; you would have said in emphatic language to mine ene- 
mies, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further ; and here shall 
thy proud waves be stayed. Touch not our anointed one, and 
do our prophet no harm. Do you not think so, moderator ? I 
fancy that I see by your countenance that you feel the truth 
of these considerations. Now, is it not a hard case to subject 
one to such great and protracted sufferings as I have endured, 
for a trivial non-conformity to an humanly-devised standard 
of theological truth ? I will not believe yet, what many of 
my most respected friends do, that you are actuated by mo- 
tives of personal hostility to the accused. I will not say that 
your hollow professions of friendship, during the two years 
past, place you in the predicament of an individual who 
should stand stone-still and gaze like a statue on a drowning 
friend without a single effort to employ the means in his 
power to rescue this friend from a watery grave. I will not 
say that you have beheld, not with frigid indifference but 
with a secret and malignant gratification, a pre-concerted and 
systematic attempt to blast my character and usefulness for- 
ever. But I will say that your timely interposition and judi- 
cious support eighteen months ago would have checked, and, 
perhaps, have completely crushed in the bud, the persecution 
that has been carried on against me — a persecution as relent- 
less and unjustifiable, if not as visible and as gross, as any of 
those recorded in the dark and sanguinary annals of ancient 
martyrdom. Moderator, I cannot foresee what your final de- 



7 



cision will be in this case ; but permit me to express the so- 
lemn conviction, that if you have heretofore, directly or indi- 
rectly, aided and abetted in this work of persecution, or if 
you shall hereafter do it, your influence as a Presbytery may 
accomplish the destruction of an innocent man ; may cause a 
scene of desolation which you will look back upon with regret 
and shame throughout your immortal existence, even though 
that existence should be passed with saints and angels in 
heaven. 

I say such an event is possible. It is much easier to do 
evil than to do good. I feel, however, quite assured, that no 
sentence which you can pronounce will materially affect my 
character and standing in the estimation of the inhabitants of 
New Orleans. They will judge for themselves ; and their 
judgment will be an independent and enlightened one. The 
knowledge of my character, which they have acquired during 
the eleven years of my residence with them — the informa- 
tion already in their possession concerning the origin of the 
difficulties between me and the Presbytery — and their length- 
ened personal acquaintance with the witnesses whose testi- 
mony has been adduced to establish my guilt, — will enable 
them to take a correct view of the whole case, and to dis- 
cern, with almost intuitive certainty, the falsity of the charges 
on which I am arraigned. Many of my personal friends du- 
ring the summer months travel extensively through the Wes- 
tern, Middle, and Northern states. From them I have learn- 
ed something of the nature and extent of the calumnies that 
have been propagated abroad concerning my sentiments and 
character. Gross misrepresentations of my theological views 
and preaching have reached that part of the United States 
where my parents and relatives, where the companions of 
my childhood and youth, reside. Their esteem and confi- 
dence I value highly. By submitting to this investigation I 
hope to be placed in the possession of documents which will 
convince them how undeserved are the reproaches, how 
groundless the accusations, w T hich have awakened their appre- 
hensions, and (as I have reason to fear) in some degree shaken 
the confidence with which they have heretofore regarded me. 



3 



It would afford me much pleasure, moderator, could I rely 
on your candour, integrity, and magnanimity of feeling, to aid 
me in unravelling the mysteries of this case ; in eliciting and 
publishing the truth, to the intent that the religious commu- 
nity at a distance might be disabused of the unfounded preju- 
dices which they have been entertaining to my disadvantage. 

The junior member of the prosecuting committee remarked 
yesterday, that it was to him quite inexplicable that the ac- 
cused should have been so inattentive to the charges that 
have been preferred against him, and so remiss about pro- 
viding adequate means of self-defence. Had I been (said 
this brother) in the situation of the accused, I would (if it were 
necessary) have travelled all over the United States ; I would 
have devoted my whole time and energies to collecting the 
materials requisite to vindicate my character. And truly, 
moderator, in that case he might have given his whole time 
to the work of self-vindication, for I believe he has no pas- 
toral charge, is not dependent for a subsistence on his pro- 
fessional efforts, has a good overseer to superintend his 
slaves and plantation, and might probably travel all over the 
United States, or reside in any part of them for any length of 
time, and nobody at home would suffer from his absence ; nor 
would his annual incoming of cotton be much diminished 
thereby. But, Sir, the accused for some years past has been 
called to preside over a rapidly increasing congregation. His 
official labours in amount have surpassed those of any other 
settled pastor in these United States. Of course they have 
demanded his entire and unremitted attention ; and the ac- 
cused judged that he could best defend his character by the 
faithful and vigorous performance of all his personal, social, 
and professional duties. Besides, many of the charges 
brought against the accused seemed to him to be so abso- 
lutely frivolous as not to merit a serious notice. Another 
consideration has contributed to the alleged unjustifiable su- 
pine ness of the accused. I am well aware that many of the 
injurious rumours abroad concerning me have been originated 
by professors of religion, who, though probably sincere, are 
extremely weak, ignorant, and superstitious. Believing them 



9 



to be in the main honest, I was unwilling to bring them out 
from what they vainly imagined their hiding-places, and to 
set them before the whole community of New Orleans in the 
attitude of gazing stocks. Though it will appear to you, mo- 
derator, disgustingly vain, I must say that this class of my 
enemies owe their former impunity to my forbearance, and 
to my fear of injuring the cause of religion in these parts by 
exposing to the public eye the foibles and follies of its profes- 
sing friends. These and other reasons have hitherto led me, 
not with stoical indifference, but with a silent, patient, confid- 
ing, and, I hope, forgiving reliance on Almighty Providence 
for protection, to submit to the multifarious assaults from 
which I have suffered the last few years. Some of these 
have been weak, others more formidable. That they have 
brought upon me much perplexity and trouble, I will not de- 
ny. When I take a retrospect of the last eleven years, I can 
say with respect to it, in the language of an inspired but 
persecuted man, Had not the Lord been for me, had not 
God been on my side, when men rose up against me, then had 
they swallowed me up alive when their wrath burned against 
me; then the billows of opposition had swept me away; then 
the proud torrents had gone over my head. Blessed be Jeho- 
vah, who hath not given me a prey to their jaws. I have es- 
caped like a bird from the snare of the fowler ; the snare is 
broken, and I have escaped. My help is with Jehovah, who 
made heaven and earth. 

I have been not a little surprised, moderator, during the 
progress of this trial, to hear the brethren speak of my merely 
venial failings as positive crimes, as downright delinquencies, 
which could not be suffered to pass by without putting at 
hazard the purity and peace of the church. Purity and peace 
of the church — established phraseology at this day, employed 
to justify every injury done by a church judicatory to a sus- 
pected brother ; as the plausible words, zeal for God and his 
truth, were adopted by Pope Innocent III. to throw an air 
of sanctity over those abominable cruelties and murders of 
which that deservedly celebrated and lamb-like pontiff was 
the author. Now, Sir, were you to look into the dark part of 



10 



my character and conduct with an eye ever so severe and scru- 
tinizing, you would doubtless discern many things there, much, 
very much, to be deplored ; but not such deviations from truth 
or duty as involve essential dereliction of principle, as forbid 
the hope of my possessing evangelical piety, nor such as 
would justify you in erasing my name from the catalogue of 
ministers in the Presbyterian church, and sending me out into 
the world of mere laymen, scathed and blackened with an 
ecclesiastical anathema. 

But, Sir, you are not to look at the dark side only of my 
character if you desire to do me full justice. Equity, candour, 
moderation, and benevolence, are the qualities of mind which, 
combined in due proportion, should adorn and distinguish an 
ecclesiastical judge. With regard to the character of the 
best person living, it is a " mingled web of good and ill." Fi- 
guratively we may regard this good and evil as an account of 
debt and credit. If the latter preponderate in an account 
showing the pecuniary circumstances of any individual, we 
pronounce such a person to be in a solvable condition. So 
when the good, intellectual, moral, or professional in one's 
character predominates over the evil, we regard him as a 
worthy and estimable member of society. Let the decision 
in my case proceed on the above equitable principles, and it 
cannot be unfavourable to my interests. 

The inuendo has been made by several of the brethren, that 
an inordinate desire to render my church a place of fashion- 
able and popular resort, has led me, perhaps unconsciously, to 
adulterate the pure gospel in order to accommodate it to a 
corrupt and worldly taste. In reply to this insinuation, per- 
mit me to remark, that during my ministry in New Orleans 
I have uniformly (both in the pulpit and out of it) contended for 
what I believed to be the faith once delivered to the saints. 1 
have not shunned to declare the whole counsel of God. I have 
not, intentionally, kept back any truth of the gospel because 
I suspected that my hearers would not like it. I have not 
consulted the wishes of the carnal, unrenewed heart. I have 
always been afraid of imbibing latitudinarian doctrines, be- 
cause I think the depraved mind of man has naturally a bias 



11 



to such doctrines. I have always explicitly insisted on the 
following doctrines in my public and private courses of in- 
struction : — the plenary inspiration of the Holy Scriptures ; the 
original rectitude of our first parents ; their subsequent apos- 
tacy, reaching in its effects to all their offspring in such a man- 
ner as to involve them in all the ruins of sin without the in- 
terference of divine grace ; the indispensable need of the 
influences of the Holy Spirit to regeneration ; the divinity and 
atonement of the Son of God ; the necessity of every sin- 
ner's being created anew in Christ Jesus before he can enter 
into the bosom of the Father ; the final judgment ; and the 
eternal duration of heaven's felicity and hell's torments. 

But I am called on to reply to an insinuation of a much 
more weighty import than the one just noticed. It is this : 
that in the exhibitions of my theological views, presented 
(from time to time) to Presbytery, I have made use of terms 
and phrases in senses different from those ordinarily affixed 
to them by ministers of the gospel and theological writers in 
general. I admit, moderator, that a talented and disingenuous 
theologian may for a time conceal his real opinions behind 
equivocal, perplexed, and mysterious combinations of speech. 
If there is a particle of evidence that I have had resort to a 
subterfuge so discreditable, then should you spurn me from 
your body as a most unworthy member. I solemnly aver, 
moderator, that in all my statements to the Presbytery I have 
been as plain and precise as possible. In no instance have 
I attempted to hide myself under the cover of equivocal lan- 
guage, or that of vague, general, and indefinite terms. When 
under the necessity of using technical words, I have taken 
especial care to explain so precisely the sense in which they 
were employed, as to leave no room for cavilling, mistake, or 
misapprehension. In my poor judgment, it is the duty of 
every Presbyterian clergyman, at this important crisis of the 
church, to express his tenets and principles in the most un- 
ambiguous and explicit language. This duty I have uni- 
formly attempted to perform in my intercourse with the Mis- 
sissippi Presbytery. 

It has been said by more than one of the brethren, that the 

4 



12 



harmony of the church in New Orleans was originally disturbed 
by controversial discourses on the Calvinistic doctrines, which 
were delivered by the accused in the years 1823 and 4. Fur- 
ther, it is alleged that those discourses were at the time un- 
called for, and directly calculated to inflame and distract the 
minds of the church. It was my duty, affirms a senior bro- 
ther, to have kept out of the pulpit all discussion appertaining 
to doctrines not essential to salvation. The facts on this point 
I will endeavour to state before I sit down ; and will now 
simply remark, that ever since my settlement in New Orleans, 
I have regarded controversy among christians with strong 
abhorrence. I am not opposed to friendly discussions on the 
facts or philosophy of religion ; but controversies on theolo- 
gical points, acknowledged not to be essential to salvation, 
constitute, in my opinion, the severest scourge that the church 
of Christ has ever been afflicted with. So strong are my 
feelings as to this particular, that, if permitted to act accord- 
ing to my own judgment, I would extend the christian name 
and fellowship to all professing believers in the gospel, of un- 
exceptionable deportment, however erroneous might be the ar- 
ticles of their creed. Not long since I heard the assertion 
made on good authority, that an intelligent and respectable 
officer in one of our churches had been led to doubt the divine 
origin of the christian religion from reading (for the first 
time) Buck's Theological Dictionary. 

Now, whilst I admit that the faults and corruptions of 
ministers do not necessarily disprove the truth of the religion 
which they advocate, at the same time I think, that though 
Christianity is true, it must of course be stationary or decline so 
long as its avowed friends fail to hold the faith in unity of spirit, 
in the bond of peace, and in righteousness of life. So large a 
portion of ecclesiastical history is but a narrative of follies, 
crimes, and sufferings, that of late years, moderator, I never 
look into it without painful and gloomy emotions. Nor can I 
resist the conviction that these sins and miseries have chiefly 
originated in a spirit of vehement and unhallowed controversy 
concerning the non-essential doctrines of religion. 

From the personal observations which I have made during 



13 



a residence of sixteen years in the valley of the Mississippi, 
I am compelled to believe that the cause of religion in this 
fair and fertile section of our land has been hindered from 
advancing, more by the unnecessary disputes and discredit- 
able bickerings of professing christians than any thing else. 
I have travelled in all parts of the Mississippi valley, and do 
know that throughout this extended region no inconsiderable 
part of the time and talents of those called ministers of the 
gospel have been for years employed in contending, conceal- 
ing, equivocating, calumniating, perverting the Scriptures and 
the views of each other ; in being jesuitical, sly, intriguing, 
ambitious, selfish, proud, and tyrannical in their professional 
walk. I speak of ministers that are hopefully pious. Most 
deleterious has been the effect of these deficiencies on the 
faith, piety, morals, and character of the respective flocks com- 
mitted to their charge. They have given occasion to the ene- 
my to divide and conquer us. They have tended to corrupt 
the natural conscience, to multiply infidels, prevent genuine 
conversions, and to call down upon us the displeasure of the 
Most High. No enemy of Christ is more formidable than 
the demon of ecclesiastical strife. We have ministers or 
teachers of religion enough in the valley of the Mississippi. 
They are as numerous, in proportion to the population, as in 
Spain, Portugal, Great Britain, or the New England States. 
In the accounts published in the religious newspapers and pe- 
riodicals, purporting to show the want of religious teachers in 
the Mississippi valley, I have always remarked that no men- 
tion is made of those ministers who have not received a clas- 
sical education. This is a gross error or a gross deception ; 
for many self-taught ministers among us are not inferior in 
piety, attainments, and usefulness, to the most conspicuous of 
our regularly educated clergy. As it is, the inhabitants of these 
Western and South- Western States possess the necessary 
means of religious improvement. The low state of religion 
among us is to be ascribed to the imprudent, sectarian, and 
unexemplary conduct of our clergy. Were all our ministers 
to adopt the plan of preaching the simple doctrines of the 
gospel, instead of the distinguishing tenets of Calvin, Armi- 



11 



nicus, Edwards, or Wesley ; were they all solicitous to propa* 
gate the Bible, not human creeds ; to promote peace, not war ; 
love, not hatred ; union, not discord ; " the lovely fruits of peace 
u and charity," not a barren empty faith ; Zion, even in these 
frontier states, would soon look forth fresh as the morning, fair 
as the moon, clear as the sun, and terrible as an army with ban- 
ners. 

All the controversial discourses that I have ever delivered 
in New Orleans, were extorted from me by the unfounded, 
though often reiterated, charge of heresy. 1 abhor, modera- 
tor, religious controversy ; and this abhorrence has led to the 
mild, respectful, conciliatory language and treatment adopted 
by the accused, for some years past, with respect to other de- 
nominations. It is by long-suffering, forbearance, and mutual 
concessions only, that pernicious disputes on the subject of 
religion can be avoided in such a place as New Orleans. 
These efforts to be on amicable terms with all other denomi- 
nations, have been falsely represented by my enemies as hav- 
ing originated in an abandonment of those sentiments usually 
denominated orthodox. It is affirmed that I have become a 
latitudinarian, because I yield to others the same rights of con- 
science and private judgment that I claim for myself. To 
think less favourably of another, or to indulge less kindly feel- 
ings towards him, solely because he differs from us in religious 
opinions, is to be guilty of harbouring a persecuting spirit. 
To manifest, by words or deeds, an unfavourable judgment of 
another's character, or hostility to him, simply because he does 
not adopt our creed, is an overt act of persecution, as repre- 
hensible, if not as palpable, as the burnings to death, imprison- 
ments for life, and other corporal pains inflicted on heretics 
(so called) in former times. 

One of the general charges brought against me is, that I 
have avowed and taught doctrines inconsistent with the Con- 
fession of Faith and Catechisms adopted by the Presbyterian 
church in the United States of America, after I had solemnly 
promised to support them. 

In reply to this charge, I remark, in the first place, that / 
have never assumed the obligations which it alleges. When 



15 



Utid where did I promise to maintain, as true, every thing coil^ 
tained in the Confession of Faith and Catechisms of the Pres- 
byterian church ? Was it in my letter soliciting admission into 
your body in 1823 ? There is not a word in that letter about 
promising to support the Confession of Faith and Catechisms 
of the Presbyterian church. All that it contains concerning 
my doctrinal views, is the simple remark, that they were sub- 
stantially those of the Andover Theological Seminary and 
the orthodox Congregational churches throughout New Eng- 
land. This declaration was sincerely made, and, I believe, 
was strictly true. If it involve a promise on my part to the 
Presbytery, it was the indirect or implied one to maintain the 
theology of the Theological Seminary at Andover, Massachu- 
setts. In the account given on your records of my reception 
into the Mississippi Presbytery, the following words are found : 
" It appearing to the satisfaction of the Presbytery that the 
" Rev. Theodore Clapp is a regularly ordained minister of the 
" Congregational church, and that his deportment corresponds 
" with his office, Therefore resolved that he be received as a 
" member of this Presbytery." At that time I was an utter 
stranger to you all. Not one of you had ever seen my face. 
You knew nothing about my theological views but what could 
be inferred from the fact that I was a minister in good stand- 
ing of the Congregational church. 

But the senior member of the prosecuting committee takes 
the ground, that by the very act of applying for admission into 
your body, I virtually made the promise above specified. Is 
this a correct position ? Is it generally understood that no 
minister in the Presbyterian church can deny or doubt the 
truth of one article in the Confession of Faith without violat- 
ing his promise to support that church ? Do you require, as 
an indispensable pre-requisite to the admitting of a minister 
into this body, that he shall solemnly promise to regard the 
Confession of Faith and the shorter and longer Catechisms as 
an infallible standard of belief and practice so long as he shall 
continue to be a member of the Presbyterian church ? Then 
you must go upon the ground that the said Confession of Faith 
and Catechisms are inspired works. But hear the Confession 



16 



itself on this point. It affirms, that in all controversies, no 
standard of truth shall be admitted but the original Hebrew 
and Greek Scriptures. It will not do, then, to say, as you 
have said, moderator, that every Presbyterian minister who 
will not adopt the interpretation of the Bible contained in the 
Confession of Faith and Catechisms should be turned out of 
the church. To make out that a minister is heretical, you 
must show, not that he avows and teaches doctrines inconsis- 
tent with your standards, but that he avows and teaches con- 
trary to the Holy Scriptures. I was told at the commence- 
ment of this trial, that this court would not permit the accused 
to attempt to prove that his theological views were in accord- 
ance with Sacred Writ. You have decided that this question 
cannot legally come before you. You charge me with heresy, 
and at the same time take from me the only possible means 
of proving my soundness in the faith. You may reply in the 
negative, and allege that you call upon me to prove that my 
doctrines are either contained in the Confession of Faith, or 
are not vitally at variance with it. But this is contrary to our 
constitution, which denies that there is any standard of truth 
besides the Bible. Again : on the supposition that I am to be 
tried by the shorter Catechism, we shall meet with insuperable 
obstacles, from the fact that there is a diversity of views as to 
the true meaning of several parts of this creed. You under- 
stand certain parts of the Catechism in one way ; other Pres- 
byteries understand them differently. Which shall be regard- 
ed as orthodox, the old school or new ? 

X,et the real state of the case be made known. In this trial 
you set up your own opinions as a standard. I must not only 
adopt the Catechisms of the Presbyterian church as / under- 
stand them, but I must receive them in the same manner in 
which you do, or be stigmatized as an heretic. Is this just, 
reasonable, or constitutional ? 

A brother has said, that the General Assembly, in the Con- 
fession of Faith and Catechisms which they have adopted, 
declare what they believe to be the true interpretation of 
Scripture ; and that every Presbyterian minister is bound to 
receive it as true or to leave the church. Now, what is this, 



17 



moderator, but sheer popery ? I heard bishop England, of the 
Roman Catholic church, not long ago affirm from the pulpit, 
" that it would be injurious to the people at large to read the 
" Bible, because they are not competent to ascertain its true 
" import. Let every body have the Bible, (said he,) in the 
" pale of our denomination, and the Roman Catholic church 
" would soon be filled with those numerous and detestable he- 
" resies that pervade the Protestant world. The priesthood 
" are authorized to decide infallibly what is Scripture, and 
" the laity are bound implicitly to obey their decisions." It 
seems to me that the brother above alluded to adopts a simi- 
lar principle. The General Assembly must decide what is 
Scripture, and to their decision the whole Presbyterian church 
must say Amen. 

Not many months had elapsed after my connexion with 
your body, before I was requested to state by letter (address- 
ed to Rev. James Smylie,) my views of the Confession of 
Faith and Catechisms adopted by the Presbyterian church. 
With this request I . promptly and frankly complied. That 
letter will speak for itself. Therein I declare my belief, that 
the Holy Scripture, containeth all things necessary to salvation ; 
so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved there- 
by, is not to be required of any man that it should be believed 
as an article of the Faith, or be thought requisite to salvation. 
In the same communication I affirm that I can subscribe to 
the Confession of Faith and Catechisms adopted by the Pres- 
byterian church as a good exhibition of the essential doctrines 
of the Gospel. Thirdly : that I approved of the form of go- 
vernment adopted by the Presbyterian church. Fourthly : 
that I felt myself under obligations to promote the peace and 
prosperity of said church. Such is, I believe, the sum and 
substance of the letter alluded to. I did not keep a copy of it- 
Mr. Smylie's answer to my letter I have : in which he assures 
me that he and his brethren had no doubts as to my essential' 
orthodoxy. They had entertained doubts prior to the recep- 
tion of my letter. This had removed them. Now, modera- 
tor, the sentiments expressed in that letter were held by the 
accused up to the very time when he sought to be separated 



18 



from you by an honourable dismission. Look at the simple 
declarations which then satisfied you of my orthodoxy. The 
Bible is the only infallible standard of faith and practice. 
The Catechism of the Westminster Assembly of Divines is a 
good compendium of evangelical truth. I approve of the 
form of church government adopted by the General Assem- 
bly. I sincerely intend to promote the peace and welfare of 
the Presbyterian church. Both the Catechism and the form 
of government are human productions, and are consequently 
imperfect : I never dreamed that they were to be placed upon 
the same level with the Bible. It was always my opinion 
that they are legitimate subjects of criticism, and that it was 
one's duty to point out what seems to be faulty in them. In 
addition to these facts, my brethren know that I have uni- 
formly professed my willingness to withdraw from the Pres- 
bytery whenever they signified a wish that I should do so. 
You know further, that I have always believed that my theo- 
logical views were not essentially different from those held 
by a majority of ministers in the Presbyterian church. What 
foundation, then, for the assertion, that I have deliberately as- 
sailed and attempted to overthrow the very doctrines that I 
had solemnly promised to defend ? 

As co-presbyters, you are, in a limited sense, the guardians 
of my faith. It is your duty, perhaps, to suspend, depose, or 
excommunicate a co-presbyter, who, after due admonition, 
persists in avowing and teaching doctrines essentially erro- 
neous. 

No evidence has been adduced that the accused is funda- 
mentally wrong in any of his theological views. The sum and 
substance of his heresy is, that he differs from the Mississippi 
Presbytery concerning the philosophy of some of the christian 
doctrines. For example, with you I profess to believe the 
doctrine of original sin ; that our first parents were created 
holy ; that the consequences of their first sin reach to all 
mankind, and would prove the ruin of all without the inter- 
ference of divine grace. You contend that I must believe 
that Adam's sin was imputed to each of his descendants in such 
a manner, that, as soon as they are born, they are deserving 



19 



of death, temporal, spiritual, and eternal. Now, I do not be- 
lieve that the Scripture teacheth that it would be just in God 
to inflict eternal punishment upon an infant, not guilty of ac- 
tual transgression, merely on account of Adam's sin ; or, in 
other words, we both admit the doctrine of original sin, but 
differ in our views of its philosophical nature. Now, as co- 
presbyters, I do not think you have any power to meddle with 
my philosophy as to the christian system. I believe in the 
atonement ; by which I mean the simple fact, that the vicarious 
sufferings and death of the Son of God were an indispensable 
pre-requisite to the remission of sins. You can constitution- 
ally insist upon my subscribing to the doctrine of atonement 
as above explained, but you have no authority to require of 
me the adoption of any particular theory or views as to the 
nature and extent of the atonement. You cannot lawfully 
impose on me merely human opinions. This, however, as I 
conceive, you have attempted to do. From this attempt have 
flowed most of our difficulties. You do not like the Andover 
theology, and you intend to compel me to adopt that of Dr. 
Green. I protest against the justice and constitutionality of 
such compulsion. Your only defence is that you act con- 
scientiously. You believe that particular -views of the nature of 
original sin, atonement, and some other doctrines, are best cal- 
culated to promote the peace and purity of the church ; you 
are therefore bound in conscience to maintain them by all the 
means in your power. One of these means is ecclesiastical 
authority or church discipline. 

Simply because I have differed from you as to certain Cal- 
vinistic dogmas, you assail my ministerial character ; you do 
all in your power to deprive me of the means of usefulness, by 
endeavouring to awaken suspicions in the minds of my people 
as to my piety and the correctness of my religious views. I 
complain of this treatment. I affirm it to be, in my poor 
judgment, absolute persecution. You defend it by the allega- 
tion that you act conscientiously. You set up the plea of con. 
science as a complete justification. Ecclesiastical tyrants in 
every age and clime have adopted the same plea to vindicate 
their enormities and perpetrations. It is not enough to plead 



20 



conscience as an excuse for attacking a brother's name, repti^ 
tation, usefulness, and privileges ; for your conscience may 
be wrong and perverted. The plea, then, is sophism ; an 
abuse of the most precious gift of heaven to man— the power 
of moral discrimination ; and it may be the grossest injustice, 
under the specious and attractive garb of zeal for God and his 
truth. Conscience is dependent on the judgment, and is an 
improveable possession of the mind. The rights of my con- 
science are limited by the rights of my neighbour's conscience. 
When I perceive that my conscience operates in such a way 
as to violate the rights of my neighbour, I cannot but know 
that my conscience is bad, and that I am bound to correct it. 
Conscience stands upon the same ground with any other ar- 
ticle of the mind. It may become depraved as easily as any 
other faculty. A person might break my head, and in so do- 
ing act conscientiously ; but would this make it a righteous 
deed?. Would not my suffering be the same as if he had 
been actuated by anger or revenge. Suppose we were to 
take Father Smylie, and, after stripping him, should tie him 
up to one of these trees and inflict forty stripes save one upon 
his bare back : and suppose further, that with a cool and sanc- 
timonious air we should reply to his vociferations and com- 
plaints, by alleging that we acted conscientiously : would 
this satisfy the injured brother? Would it convince anybody 
that our course was justifia >ie ? But you have aimed at me a 
greater injury than any corporal infliction within the bounds of 
possibility. To my remonstrances, you calmly say we have 
the approbation of our consciences. So had Paul the approba- 
tion of his conscience when he was shedding the blood of 
christians. Was this a satisfactory vindication of his nefarious 
course ? If the operations of conscience are not to be con- 
trolled and directed by the divine laws, then sweep society 
from the earth at once ; you have no security left for person, 
reputation, liberty, or life. 

Now, moderator, permit me to direct your attention to my 
condition, and your duty, as determined by the General Assem- 
bly in May 1831. By that decision I was pronounced to be 
a member of and amenable to your body. As a consequence 



21 



of this act, I resumed my seat as a member of the Mississippi 
Presbytery, at their meeting in Port Gibson, October 183L 
My object in meeting you was not to answer any charges 
brought against me, for none had been constitutionally pre- 
ferred ; but simply that I might have an opportunity to subject 
anew my doctrinal sentiments to your inspection ; believing 
that some of you had both misunderstood and misrepresented 
them. My wish was to effectuate an amicable settlement of 
the difficulties between us, because it seemed to me that such 
a settlement would contribute to the advancement of religion 
in these parts. At that time I indulged the hope that the Pres- 
bytery would be willing to meet me on the principles, and in 
the exercise of the spirit, enjoined by our Lord in the following 
passages of Sacred Writ. Moreover, if thy brother shall tres- 
pass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him 
alone ; if he shall hear thee, though hast gained thy brother. 
But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, 
that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be 
established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto 
the church : but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto 
thee as an heathen man arid a publican. Or, in other words, 
then institute judicial process against him ; and if he continue 
refractory, insubordinate, and contumacious, cut him off. With 
this expectation I availed myself of every opportunity which 
occurred during said meeting of Presbytery, to exhibit to my 
brethren, both by written and verbal communications, (and 
with all the frankness and candour of which I am capable,) my 
definite views on all those points concerning which the sound- 
ness of my faith had been called in question or suspected. 
Let it not be forgotten that these communications were made 
in various ways and at different times ; in free conversations 
with members of your body during evening visits at private 
houses ; in the discourses which I delivered at Port Gibson ; 
and particularly in the successive interviews that took place 
between me and the committee appointed by the Presbytery to 
confer with the accused on his doctrinal sentiments. During 
these occasions I endeavoured to state precisely my views of 
what is usually styled Calvinism ; how far I concurred with, 



22 



or dissented from, the great reformer, in reference to what are 
denominated the five points. My statements were as full and 
explicit as I knew how to make them. After a thorough ex- 
amination of them, the Committee of Conference reported, 
that there was no such essential difference between my views and 
yours as to disqualify me for continuing to officiate as a 7ninis~ 
ter of the Presbyterian church. This report the Presbytery 
accepted by a unanimous vote. In private conversation, a 
majority of the members expressed to me the opinion that I 
was fairly within the pale of the New School ; and that since 
great numbers embracing the views of this school, were per- 
mitted to retain their standing in the Presbyterian church, a 
similar indulgence might lawfully be extended to me. Such, 
you will observe, was the result of an amicable inquiry into 
my theological sentiments. You found nothing in them essen- 
tially objectionable. At that time, then, permit me to ask, what 
insuperable obstacle remained in the way of accomplishing a 
complete settlement ? Surely none, moderator. To me it 
appeared that the door was open for the establishment of 
permanent peace on safe, honourable, and constitutional prin- 
ciples. 

So, also, it appeared to the majority of my brethren, as they 
often affirmed in my presence. Nevertheless it was thought 
expedient by the majority of your body to appoint a Commit- 
tee to inquire into the ground of the rumours against the sound- 
ness of my theology so extensively disseminated, and to re- 
port at the subsequent meeting of Presbytery. This measure 
I cordially approved of at the time. It appeared to me neces- 
sary, in order that my opposers in New Orleans might have 
an opportunity to give testimony, in a public and solemn man- 
ner, touching my heresies and all other matters entering into the 
causes of their separation from me. It was desirable, also, on 
other grounds. Such an investigation promised to place in 
my hands the materials and means of self-vindication, in re- 
ference to all the rumours, inuendoes, and charges prejudicial 
to my character. Rumour, the Roman poet says, is a fiend 
that moves with a continually accelerated velocity. By ex- 
erting her agility she grows more active, and acquires new 



23 



strength by progressive motion. Small at first, through fear, 
no long time elapses before she shoots up into the skies, and 
stalks upon the ground with gigantic stature, hiding her head 
among the clouds. A monster, hideous and enormous ; for, 
equal to the number of her plumes are her wakeful eyes, 
slanderous tongues, babbling mouths, and listening ears. By 
night through the mid region of the air, and through the shades 
of earth she flies buzzing, nor ever inclines her eyes to balmy 
rest ; watchful by day, she perches either on some high house- 
top or on lofty turrets, and fills mighty cities with dismay ; as 
obstinately bent on uttering falsehood and iniquity as on re- 
porting truth. With diversified reports she fills the people's 
ears, pleased with her task, and utters fictions and matters of 
fact indifferently. This monster, or one of similar attributes, 
has found her way to the banks of the great Father of waters, 
and has several favourite haunts within the bounds of the Mis- 
sissippi Presbytery. Some of you, my brethren, I fear (though 
you are not conscious of it) are at this moment under her 
baleful influence. She has filled your ears with idle rumours. 
She has palmed fictions upon you as matters of fact. She has 
metamorphosed falsehood and iniquity into truth and righteous- 
ness. An investigation, based upon logical evidence and valid 
testimony, I always believed would enable me to counteract 
the machinations of this fiend by the superior efficacy of truth 
and knowledge. 

Some of my brethren, at the time of the meeting at Port 
Gibson, (as they themselves have subsequently acknowledged,) 
entertained doubts concerning my sincerity and candour. 
They saw nothing in the exhibitions of my doctrinal views 
essentially wrong ; and yet were unwilling to act upon them, 
because they suspected that Iwas endeavouring, by duplicity, 
concealment, and equivocation, to obtain restoration to the 
confidence of the Presbytery. What ground has there been, 
or is there now, for such a suspicion ? But suppose that there 
were some circumstances in my case justifying apprehensions 
in reference to my integrity, even then you would be under 
imperative obligations to treat me as honest until conclusive 
proof of my guilt could be adduced. For years past you have 



24 



spoken of me, and conducted towards me, as though there was 
no longer room for doubt concerning my irreligion and uttef 
worthlessness. When I have expostulated with you in pri- 
vate on the injustice of such a course, the strongest apology 
which you have attempted to offer is, that you have some sus- 
picions as to my sincerity. Suspicions as to my sincerity 3 
And has it come to this,— that an ecclesiastical body, in this 
liberal and enlightened land, may denounce and pursue with 
anathemas an individual wha is obnoxious to their suspicions 
only, but whose guilt has never been demonstrated. 

Some one has defined suspicion to be, " the imagination of 
" the existence of something without proof, or upon slight evi- 
dence, or upon no evidence at all." Suspicion proceeds 
from the apprehension of evil : it is the offspring or companion 
of jealousy. "Suspicions (affirms Lord Bacon) are among 
" thoughts like bats among birds, they ever fly by twilight." 
They find no resting-place in a candid and benevolent bosom. 
As bats shun the day, so do suspicions shrink from the sun- 
shine of an honourable and unpolluted mind. Their appro- 
priate dwelling-place is a soul, narrow, shrivelled, cold, dark, 
selfish, little, and malevolent. Is a man to be pronounced 
guilty upon no evidence at all, or upon insufficient evidence ? 
Is it not plain that suspicion is an inadequate basis for mea- 
sures essentially affecting the rights, reputation, and happiness 
of a fellow-being ? What security is there for the innocent, 
if they may be lawfully assailed and prostrated to gratify an 
adamantine, envious, and suspicious heart? A malevolent 
person, moderator, can without much difficulty set in motion 
a train of measures, which may for a season cause a worthy 
and useful member of society to be distrusted and depressed. 
It is easy, by an ingenious hint, a shake of the head, a suspi- 
cious look, and various other artifices, to bring a cloud over a 
person's good name, and to cast about those slanderous reports 
which Solomon compares to fire-brands, arrows, and death. 
There are individuals in every community, to whom no feast 
is so agreeable as that made on murdered reputation. These 
do often succeed in depressing, temporarily, the most upright 
and deserving, by involving them in the mists of general sus- 



25 



picion. Surely this Presbytery will not adopt a principle of 
action that may lead them to tarnish the fair fame of one 
who has nothing else beneath the sun that he can call his own. 
It is a severe affliction to be deprived of the means of subsist- 
ence, to be cast moneyless upon the charities of the world ; 
it is a greater trial still, to be called to consign to the cold 
grave an only surviving relative or friend. But if from the 
wreck of fortune and family, one is able to save what is more 
precious than all,— an unsullied reputation, a good name among 
his fellow-beings, — he still possesses something to support him ; 
something worth living for ; something by which he may ho- 
nour God, and be useful in his day and generation. By mak- 
ing suspicion the ground of measures with respect to the ac- 
cused, you may rob him of his last, his best, his only treasure. 
Will my brethren deliberately pursue a course at which eve- 
ry generous mind revolts as inhuman ; that is so incompatible 
with the spirit of that religion of which you are the professed 
teachers ; that may plant thorns in the bosom of an innocent 
man, and do him an irreparable injury ? It is the prerogative 
of a narrow and uncharitable disposition to look at the dark 
side only of one's character ; to put the worst construction on 
doubtful cases ; and to endeavour to preserve in remembrance 
those lesser, venial errors and misdeeds, over which oblivion 
should have dropped her pall, and the traces of which the 
tears of repentance may have long since quite washed away. 

In connexion with this topic, I ask you to notice a remark 
which fell from Mr. Chase when answering the question, 
"Why he had circulated the report, in 1830, that the accused 
" was at heart a Unitarian V One of the reasons which he 
assigned for circulating such a rumour was, that I had been 
heard to declare from the pulpit my determination henceforth 
to follow the truth only in my preaching, to whatever conclu- 
sions it might lead me. " Such a profession (adds Mr. Chase) 
"•is in the Northern States usually considered the forerunner 
" of apostacy from the orthodox faith." This was news to 
me, moderator. It is the first time that I ever heard it laid 
down as a sign of a minister's being latitudinarian, that he 
publicly professed to be an impartial and sincere inquirer after 



* 



26 

truth. Do not ministers of every denomination, in all parts of 
the United States, publicly profess to be guided by the light 
of truth only ? Is devotion to the cause of truth an evidence 
of apostacy ? Then does apostacy abound even in heaven . 
But, conceding the accuracy of the statement with respect to 
ministers in the Northern States, the inference drawn from it 
is illogical. The argument may be thus expressed: when 
certain ministers in New England are upon the eve of abjuring 
a sound creed, it is remarked that they are loud and frequent 
in their professions of attachment to the truth ; therefore, if a 
Presbyterian minister in Louisiana professes to be the disciple 
of truth, he may be fairly considered either as being on the 
point of desertion, or as having already gone over to the side 
of the enemy. Admirable reasoning ! Will such a sophism 
satisfy the brother's conscience ? " Mr. Clapp professes to love 
" the truth, therefore it is right for me to affirm that he is a 
" Unitarian." The illiterate heathen expect that the appear- 
ance of a comet will of course be followed by famine, war, 
or some other public calamity ; because that, in perhaps a sin- 
gle instance, the appearance of a comet and a public calamity 
have been connected by the relation of antecedent and conse- 
quent. The Indians of Paraguay supposed the baptismal ce- 
remony to be the cause of death, because the Jesuit mission- 
aries, whenever opportunity offered, administered it to dying 
infants, and to adults in the last stage of disease. By a pro- 
cess of reasoning equally fallacious, brother Chase has disco- 
vered the general principle — that a public profession of attach- 
ment to truth is indissolubly associated with an abandonment 
of the orthodox creed. A word to the wise is sufficient. I 
have dwelt for a moment on this topic, merely to furnish a sam- 
ple of the facility with which a suspicious or hostile mind can 
rush to the conclusions that are agreeable to its taste. 

In October, 1831, 1 exhibited to the Presbytery an explicit 
statement of my views on the points with respect to which I 
had been thought heretical. Now, it seems to me, that you 
were called on under these circumstances, at that time, either 
to have received the statement as satisfactory, or to have point- 
ed out its objectionable parts. This was a duty imposed on 



27 



you by the spirit of our holy religion, and by the express pro- 
visions of the constitution of our church. If you thought me 
to have been in error, it was your duty to have told me so. 
But at Port Gibson you all told me that my theological views, 
as then exhibited, were correct as to essential points. With 
what propriety, then, could you subsequently accuse me of 
heresy ? The case stands thus : I solemnly aver that such and 
such are my doctrinal sentiments. You concede that these 
sentiments are fundamentally sound. At the same time you 
charge me with heterodoxy. Is there not in this a glaring in- 
consistency ? Did you not go on the ground, moderator, that 
I did not (at Port Gibson) exhibit to Presbytery my real sen- 
timents ? Most assuredly you did. Then the Presbytery 
should have arraigned me on the charge of intentional decep- 
tion, of deliberately holding and avowing one set of opinions 
at Port Gibson and a different set at New Orleans. This 
was the open, fair, correct, and honourable course for you to 
have pursued. Heresy in my avowed sentiments, you con- 
cede there is none. The only vulnerable point, then, you 
could rationally expect to find in me, in reference to doctrine, 
was discrepant statements as to my views, that had been appa- 
rently made in accommodation to the different latitudes or 
companies in which I had been called to move ; and without 
a conscientious regard to any stable, authoritative, or publicly 
recognized standard of faith. By my opposers in this city 
the rumour was circulated, and professedly on the authority 
of the Presbytery, that at Port Gibson I denied all the essen- 
tial views of religion which I had been years before proclaim- 
ing at New Orleans. I have ground, then, for the complaint 
that the real charge against me is thrown into the back 
ground, is covered over, and a fictitious one brought for- 
ward and acted upon. To maintain consistency, you should 
have charged me with perjury ; with deliberate, wilful decep- 
tion. 

If I gave you a false statement as to my creed when at 
Port Gibson, then, as a necessary consequence, I was either 
deceived myself; I did not know what my true sentiments 
were ; or I intended to deceive others : with my eyes open, 

6 



28 



I knowingly, coolly, and voluntarily took the road of decep- 
tion, of downright, unqualified perjury. I will not waste time 
in examining the first supposition, because I suppose none of 
you are inclined to regard me as non compos mentis, as labour- 
ing under mental alienation, or as self-deceived. 

The Presbytery, then, as it seems to me, went upon the sup- 
position, in rejecting my written statements, that I was attempt- 
ing to deceive them ; that I was ready to subscribe to any 
system of religious faith, even that of Mahomet, to accomplish 
my ends. And what ends, moderator, can you imagine I 
could have expected to accomplish by leading you to miscon- 
ception concerning my sentiments ? What had I to gain by 
deceiving the Presbytery ? Deceivers and impostors do not 
act without motives. They have some end or ends in view 
when practising deception. They are actuated by regard to 
fame, money, pleasure, or something else of a kindred nature. 
A minister might conceal his true opinions for the purpose of 
building up an unpopular sect by unobserved and unsuspected 
measures. And you may think that I was anxious to preserve 
the appearance and reputation of orthodoxy for the purpose of 
guarding against those secessions from my church by which 
it might be much reduced and weakened, and perhaps finally 
broken up. You may suspect that I assumed the garb of 
sound doctrine in order to secure the support of the most 
pious, useful, and valuable members of my congregation. 

In answer to this suggestion I would remark, that every 
tolerably well-informed clergyman cannot but feel, however 
unprincipled he may be, that in ecclesiastical matters honesty 
is the best policy. Surely, none who know the accused can 
impute to him such a degree of imbecility and folly as would 
lead him to rely on deception, on pious frauds, to maintain 
himself and congregation in New Orleans. Can it be be- 
lieved that I am so blind, as not to perceive that at the pre- 
sent time the state of the church renders it almost impossible 
for a public teacher of religion to conceal his sentiments. 
Pronounce me wicked, if you please ; but do not impute to 
me such a breadth, depth, and length of fatuity, as no minis- 
ter in his sober senses was ever known to evince ; and which. 



29 



in my case, no one of my acquaintances can believe to be 
possible. Again : the supposition takes for granted (what is not 
true) that a known, acknowledged departure, on my part, from 
the system commonly styled orthodox, would reduce, weaken, 
or break up my church. Should I declare myself to be a 
Unitarian, some of the church members would leave me, but 
their places would be instantly filled with others not at all infe- 
rior to them in respectability. Such is the ardent attachment 
of the inhabitants of New Orleans to what may properly be 
denominated liberal Christianity, that they would rush with 
united hearts and hands to the support of any respectable 
clergyman among them who should be anathematized for 
holding and avowing an anti-Calvinistic creed. My decided 
conviction is, that my prosperity in New Orleans has been very 
much impeded by my being connected with the Presbyterian 
church. Were I actuated by selfish, sinister motives, I should 
ardently petition for a separation from your body. None, 
even but superficially acquainted with New-Orleans, can ques- 
tion the accuracy of these remarks. Say not, then, that I am 
ready to perjure myself sooner than give up the Presbyterian 
name, when, on the supposition that I am a bad man, or even 
a selfish man, the retaining of that name must be seen and 
felt by me to be detrimental to my interests. This saying 
would be a gross absurdity. 

But you may take the ground, that I have been desirous of 
concealing my sentiments in order to secure the patronage of 
the Mississippi Presbytery. I have (as I suppose) a proper 
regard for this judicatory, and all the individuals of which it is 
composed. I concede to you on the score of piety, upright- 
ness, and worth, all your claims, and all that is claimed for you 
by your warmest admirers. I have heretofore coveted your 
esteem and friendship, and have done not a little to insure the 
possession of them. In the remarks which I intend to make 
on this topic, a sense of duty constrains me to be explicit in 
my language, and I hope to express myself plainly without 
giving offence. It is insinuated, in the pastoral letter addressed 
by this Presbytery some time ago to the first Presbyterian 
ehruch in New Orleans, that I had designedly concealed my 



30 



real views from you, till by the aid of your influence I had 
built up a large and flourishing congregation. When I first 
saw this insinuation, 1 was satisfied that the Mississippi Pres- 
bytery was not aware of the standing which it has uniformly 
held in New Orleans. Sir, what is, or what has been, your 
influence in that city ? It is a mere fraction, too small to ad- 
mit of being definitely stated. Were you as enlightened and 
as pure as angels, your influence would not be felt in New 
Orleans, because you are unknown there. The inhabitants of 
that city have heard of the existence of such a body as the 
Mississippi Presbytery; occasionally they have seen some 
of you in New Orleans, transacting secular business, or sitting 
in your judicial capacity as members of a court of Jesus Christ. 
But ministers do not possess much weight at this day in any 
protestant country by virtue of their office. The people of 
New Orleans, as a community, are better informed than those 
of any other place in the United States. They have no blind, 
groundless veneration for the clergy. When they have ascer- 
tained from long and thorough experiment, from personal 
knowledge, that a minister who resides among them is calcu- 
lated to be useful, most cheerfully do they award to him sin- 
cere respect and cordial support. Not simply because he is 
a preacher ; a person who has been set apart to perform cleri- 
cal functions ; to explain and enforce the truths of the ever- 
lasting gospel ; but chiefly because he is known to be a com- 
mon friend and helper of the poor, the ignorant, the sick, the 
stranger, the forlorn, deserted, and unhappy ; because that, 
during the dreadful epidemics which rage in that city, he is 
seen to maintain his post, calm, self-possessed, and undismay- 
ed, amid more appalling desolations and frightful perils than 
were ever encountered on the most sanguinary fields of bat- 
tle ; because he is always with them in the dark hour of afflic- 
tion, in the chamber of sickness, and at the bed of death ; 
pointing the eyes of the diseased and dying to the cheering 
prospects of immortal glory through Christ. In short, a cler- 
gyman can have no influence in New Orleans, save that which 
is derived from the worth of his character and conduct. He 
must exemplify, in his daily walk and conversation, a sound and 



31 



cultivated intellect ; a pious, humble, amiable disposition ; great 
prudence of conduct ; and the entire consecration of his pow- 
ers to the cause of philanthropy. Yes, to the honour of the 
people of New Orleans be it said, that they award their re- 
spect, reverence, and affection to a minister, not on account of 
the office which he fills, but on account of the demonstrations 
which he makes of real wisdom and worth. You see, then, 
the reasons, moderator, why the influence of the Mississippi 
Presbytery, with respect to the mass of the inhabitants in New 
Orleans, is absolutely a cipher. Not that they have decided 
that you are bad men, but because you are unknown to 
them ; they have no personal acquaintance with your emi- 
ment, great, and varied excellences. I speak now of the ma- 
jority of the protestant population in New Orleans. Many 
intelligent persons in that place are under the impression that 
you are carrying on a train of hostilities against the accused ; 
that from narrowness of mind, bigotry, or some cause, you are 
seeking to undermine and destroy my influence. Nor can 
they imagine that you should wish to anihilate my character, ex- 
cept for the purpose of taking from me the means of propagat- 
ing what you believe to be heretical and dangerous views of 
religion. But my congregation are not only familiar with my 
views of Christianity ; they approve of them, I may say they 
love them. They consider them to be scriptural and reason- 
able ; tending to the glory of God, and beneficial to those who 
cherish them. By embracing the doctrines and following the 
precepts which I teach, they hope to become qualified for im- 
mortal blessedness beyond the boundaries of mortality and 
time. With what feelings, then, must they regard a body of 
ministers, who are apparently doing all in their power to in- 
jure me ; and to injure me, too, on account of my devoted ness 
to what they believe to be the cause of pure and undefiled 
religion ? Some look upon you as honest, but actuated by a 
false zeal ; others regard you with distrust ; and others again 
have no confidence in you. I have endeavoured, to the utmost 
in my power, to make the people of New Orleans think fa- 
vourably of your piety ; but such is the state of feeling there 
in regard to you, that my popularity in Louisiana would be 



32 



much augmented rather than lessened by an excision from 
your body : and such has been the state of feeling there for 
years past. It cannot be credited, then, that I have been at- 
tempting by deception to secure your influence because I 
felt that your influence was important to my prosperity in 
New Orleans. I have continued my connexion, moderator, 
with your body, under many disadvantages ; — not to gain a 
good, but to do good ; to do good to you and the cause of our 
Master, 

But, it may be said, that, supposing no motives can be as- 
signed of a suitable nature and of sufficient magnitude to have 
induced me to practise deception, nevertheless the contra- 
diction and changes in my successive communications to Pres- 
bytery, and in my preaching and conversation generally, for 
the last few years, furnish not simply presumptive, but con- 
clusive, evidence of my insincerity. Let us examine this po- 
sition. The fact that a minister has changed his opinions, is 
not conclusive evidence of his having been insincere. Every 
intelligent being but God must change his opinions more or 
less, if he be industrious, enterprising, and holy. Milton com- 
pares growth in knowledge to climbing up a steep ascent. 
Now, when we ascend a mountain, our horizon is momently 
enlarging ; of course our views are continually altering. So, 
in proportion as we make advancements in knowledge, our 
former opinions are enlarged, modified, corrected, or abandon- 
ed, as truth may direct. The inhabitants of heaven, doubtless, 
often have occasion to change their opinions ; for otherwise 
how could there be progressive improvement in heaven? 
Heaven is a world of ever enlarging intelligence, of affections 
for ever improving, and of conduct for ever refining towards 
perfection. In that better and brighter world, every passing 
day they are favoured with stronger optics, rise to a greater 
height, and look to more distant objects. There, Sir, I sup- 
pose, is a great deal of deep and sharp thinking. But created 
minds, however profound and discriminating, cannot think 
much without changing their opinions more or less. How 
absurd, then, to consider the mere fact that I have modified 



33 



gome of my opinions during the last dozen years, as legitimate 
ground for suspecting my sincerity ? 

But still, it may with propriety be alleged, that changes in 
a minister's theological views may be so sudden, frequent, and 
great, — may be attended with such circumstances, as to justi- 
fy the opinion that he is either superficial, unstable as water, 
deficient in judgment, or actuated by bad motives : or, to use 
a single phrase, that he is diseased in head or heart. Are the 
changes imputed to me of this description? All the changes 
which have been alluded to during this whole trial, relate to 
the distinguishing features of Calvinism. Now, I think that 
it is easy to evince, that, from my settlement in New Orleans 
up to this day, my views on the Calvinistic dogmas have re- 
mained essentially the same, witk the exception of one article, — 
the final perseverance of the saints. I had not preached long 
in New Orleans, before some of the church members publicly 
complained of my not preaching about the doctrines of the 
decrees of God and the divine sovereignty. A Committee 
waited on me to inform me of this dissatisfaction, and to re- 
quest me to come out plainly, and give them from the pulpit 
my views on the essential points of the Calvinian faith. I felt 
obliged to comply with the request, though I was apprehen- 
sive that the compliance might lead to controversy and schism 
in the church. The sermon which I then delivered on elec- 
tion was subsequently written, and is now in a state of pre- 
servation. I have sent a copy of it to Dr. Ely of Philadelphia. 
That will show, that from 1824 to 1832, my sentiments on 
election and sovereignty have been at all times fundamentally 
the same. That this sermon is a fair exhibition of my pulpit 
views on these themes, is admitted by my warmest opposers 
in this city. Touching the other points of Calvinistic theology, 
the same is substantially true. On what points, then, have I 
been fluctuating 1 Name them if you can. With the excep- 
tion before made, I have simply denied supralapsarianism 
and its concomitants. I had supposed that Calvinists are 
those who hold to the leading doctrines of that system of theo- 
logy taught, explained, and defended by John Calvin. I had 
considered all those who embraced these doctrines to be supra- 



34 



lapsarians. I so expressed myself to the Committee of Con- 
ference at Port Gibson. That Committee knew, (if they 
would testify to the whole truth they would say so,) that in 
my communications to them I did not wish to impress them 
with the idea that I was a Calvinist in the legitimate sense of 
the term. They remember I told them that I belonged to 
the New School in the Presbyterian church ; and that I consi- 
dered the New School, in common with all those at this day 
styled moderate Calvinists, to be in fact Armineans : mean- 
ing, that they were in general nearer to the system of Armi- 
nius than that of Calvin. I assured that Committee, that in 
my poor judgment, those who denied supralapsarianism, to 
act consistently, could not call themselves Calvinists. What 
are the supralapsarian doctrines ? Are they not the follow- 
ing ? — Unconditional election of a part of mankind to eternal 
life, and the eternal reprobation of the remainder ; that an 
atonement has been made for the sins of the elect only ; that 
Adam's sin was imputed to his posterity in such a manner that 
all of them, as soon as they are born, are deserving of death, 
temporal, spiritual, and eternal ; and without divine grace, 
would grow up utterly indisposed and unable to obey the law 
of God ; that the soul of man is passive in conversion, and 
subjected to the irresistible influences of the Holy Spirit. 
From the first week that I entered the ministry up to the pre- 
sent day, I have always disbelieved, and occasionally preached 
against, each and all of the doctrines just specified. So I state 
in my letter to the Presbytery, March 5th, 1830. But some 
members of the Presbytery have affirmed, that in my letter 
of October 14, 1831, 1 have avowed the doctrines which are 
denied in my letter of March 5, 1830. This assertion excited 
my astonishment. Compare the two letters. Jn that of Oc- 
tober 1 declare, that since March 5th, 1830, my views on the 
essential doctrines of religion had undergone no change, with 
the exception of one point, — the perseverance of the saints ; 
that then I disbelieved and preached against the same Cal- 
vinistic doctrines that I had denied in my communication of 
March 5th, 1830. Even in the presence of all the Presbytery 
in Mr. Butler's church, I denounced and abjured the dogmas 



35 



of Calvin in as severe, pointed, and measured terms as I had 
ever used in my own pulpit ; and yet you went away from 
this same meeting of the Presbytery, and reported that I had 
declared to the Presbytery that I was a Calvinist ! This is to 
me inexplicable, on the ground that you are men of veracity. 
But I must not call in question your veracity, though you do 
mine. In my first letter I deny unconditional election and 
reprobation. Does not my second letter contain the same 
denial precisely ? Do I not there repeat the assertion, that I 
find no such doctrine in the Bible as unconditional election 
and reprobation ? Recollect that I am comparing my letters 
of March 5th, 1830, and October 14th, 1831. In my former 
epistle I deny the doctrine that an atonement has been made 
for the sins Of the elect only. Does not my letter of October 
contain the same denial 1 Do I not therein express my entire 
disbelief as to a definite atonement ? In my first letter I deny 
the literal imputation of Adam's sin to his posterity. Is not 
the same denial found in my second letter ? Do I not there 
state that I adopt the opinion of Turretine ? — that the sin of 
Adam cannot be properly and personally ours, because we 
were not in existence when it was committed. I conceive 
that it is not correct to say that a person sinned before he 
had existence. But I believe that, in consequence of Adam's 
fall, all mankind, coming into the world destitute of evangeli- 
cal holiness, become sinners as soon as they are capable of 
sinning ; and that, unless prevented by the sovereign, distin- 
guishing, and unmerited grace of God through Christ, would 
all go on sinning through eternity, and consequently be for 
ever wretched. In my first letter I deny the passivity of the 
soul in conversion, and the doctrine of the irresistible influence 
of the Holy Spirit. The same I do in my letter of October, 
in the following terms : — my belief is, that the Holy Spirit re- 
generates the soul in conversion ; breathes into it a new, holy, 
spiritual principle of life. But I doubt the propriety of apply- 
ing the epithet irresistible to the divine influence concerned in 
regeneration. 

So it seems, on inspection, that the two letters, with one ex- 
ception, are entirely harmonious. What ground, then, is there 

7 



36 



for any one, who can read and understand plain English, to 
assert that they are contradictory ; that the one avows what 
the other denies ; or that the last is a recantation of the first ? 
What ground for the assertion, that at Port Gibson, in Octo- 
ber 1831, 1 avowed, in the most unqualified manner, my be- 
lief in all the distinguishing tenets of Calvinism ? What 
ground, I ask again, for the assertion, particularly because 
when at Port Gibson in October 14, 1831, both by written 
and verbal communications, I repeatedly assured my brethren 
that my letter of March 1830, contained my present views 
with a solitary exception ? But it may be said that my views 
of theology, as stated and explained in my letter of October, 
1831, are those of the Presbyterian church generally. If so, 
then all I have to say on the subject is, that the theology of 
the Presbyterian church is not Calvinistic. Those doctrines 
denied in my letter of March, and admitted in that of Octo- 
ber, with relation to each other are antipodal ; they are as 
far from each other as the East is from the West. All in the 
least degree acquainted with theology, must see that they are 
substantially similar. 

But it may be said that the word Calvinism has different 
meanings, so that we do not know what a man intends by it 
till he explains himself precisely. This I attempted to do ; 
I believe the attempt was a successful one. I was careful to 
let my brethren know explicitly what I understood to be the 
distinguished doctrines of Calvinism in my letter of March 
1830. Now, it is hard for me to believe that any of you are 
so dull of apprehension that you really regarded my letter of 
October 1831, as avowing the Calvinism which J had denied 
in March 1830. You could not so misconstrue the letter itself. 
But were that couched in equivocal and ambiguous phraseolo- 
gy, my communications to you, through the Committee of Con- 
ference, on the Calvinistic points, are so perspicuous that no- 
body will believe that you misunderstood me. How, then, 
can we account for the assertion of members of the Presby- 
tery, — that at Port Gibson, in October 1831, 1 renounced my 
former Arminian views, and retraced my steps to the Calvinis- 
tic platform from which I had so wofully wandered ^ Here I 



37 



mn in the dark ; here I want explanation. I am unwilling 
to impute your conduct to voluntary obliquity ; nor can I re- 
gard it as the effect of ignorance, prejudice, imbecility, or 
carelessness. 

Misunderstanding and misreporting the sentiments of others, 
is the besetting sin of professing christians in this land. I may 
be guilty of it myself ; I am not intentionally so. One thing 
is plain ; that the imputing to an individual sentiments that 
he disavows, and the ascribing to him inferences from his ac- 
knowledged tenets that he denies, is the most common form 
of persecution in the United States ; it is a mode of perse- 
cution, too, of the most formidable character ; it is an engine 
of torture that may be wielded to the permanent injury of the 
wisest and the best of our race. The hurt it does is less palpable, 
but not less real and severe, than that inflicted in former times 
by the wheel, the inquisitorial flames, the cross, and the rack. 

A member of the prosecuting Committee has told you, that 
in some of my communications to the Presbytery I have 
adopted, and in others denied, the Calvinistic doctrine as to 
election. This allegation is unfounded. Reprobation is an 
essential ingredient of Calvinian election ; my disbelief of 
this has been uniformly announced. That God, from eternity, 
determined to save believers in Christ, and not to save his in- 
corrigible enemies, I have always avowed and taught. At the 
same time I have taught that salvation has been provided for 
all, and sincerely tendered to all ; so that if any of the human 
family are finally lost, it will be from their refusing to comply 
with the overtures of mercy. Known unto God are all his 
works from the beginning. Immutable are his views and pur- 
poses. Yet I have always taught that God's determination 
to save, was not formed irrespective of evangelical cha- 
racter in those elected ; not that election is founded upon our 
good works. The decree to bestow eternal life on the truly 
penitent, originated in the sovereign, distinguishing, and un- 
merited grace of God through Christ. I have uniformly 
taught that the atoning sacrifice is the sole ground or merito- 
rious cause of, and that obedience to the divine law is the indis- 
pensable pre-requisite to, our justification ; nor am I acquaint- 



38 



ed with a single sect in Christendom that bases salvation on 
human merit. Diversity, undoubtedly, there is in the views 
formed by the several denominations of christians concerning 
the nature and extent of the atonement ; yet all concur in the 
sentiment that salvation is of grace. A perfect man would 
not be entitled to a seat in heaven on the ground of merit ; 
that is, he could not claim it as an equivalent for his good 
qualities and good deeds. Such a person might rely on his 
spotless character for exemption from punishment, but not for 
admission to the heavenly state. I have been told by well- 
informed Deists, that the salvation, whose enjoyment they an- 
ticipate, will be a donation, a gratuity, a gift of infinite mercy, 
an undeserved favour. Not many days ago a Deist remarked 
to me, that he could subscribe to the doctrine of justification 
by grace as taught by the apostle Paul, and that he believed 
in the forgiveness of sins and the life everlasting. 

Some of my brethren seem to think that the assertion, that 
the decree of election is not founded on good works, means 
that God, from eternity, determined to save a certain part of 
the human family and to condemn the remainder, having no 
regard in this determination to personal character. Now, 
moderator, I have always understood by the language, " The 
" decree of God to save a certain number of the human race 
" is not founded upon any foresight of their faith and good 
" works, but upon his own mere good pleasure ;" this simple 
truth, that human merit is not the procuring cause of salvation, 
but the atoning sacrifice of the Son of God. Keeping this 
definition before the mind, it is easy, I think, to see the pro- 
priety of the language, that God from eternity determined to 
save those of the human family whom he did foreknow : that 
is, from all eternity God foresaw how many would be induced 
to repent and believe the gospel, and this definite number he 
determined to save ; at the same time the decree to save was 
not founded on the foreseen faith and repentance, on human 
merit, but on the grace of God through Christ. God so loved 
the world, as to give his only begotten Son, that whosoever be- 
lieves on him may not perish, but obtain eternal life. It was 
infinite benevolence that provided a Saviour for sinful, ruined 



39 



man ; yet this Saviour cannot be ours personally until we have 
received him by faith and repentance. It is consistent to say 
that faith and repentance are indispensable conditions to eter- 
nal life, at the same time that our acceptance to eternal life 
is not founded on these conditions, but on the everlasting, ori- 
ginal, and unchangeable love of God through the Saviour ; 
because these conditions, faith and good works, are themselves 
the gifts of God, emanations from infinite love. The same 
may be said of every good that can be possessed by christians. 
On this subject there is much misapprehending of each other's 
sentiments, arising from the want of fixed, precise, and de- 
finite terms, such as are employed in mathematics and some 
other sciences ; a desideratum which will probably never be 
supplied in this world. The uniform view which I have ad- 
vocated on personal election, may. be expressed in a single 
proposition, — God, from eternity, determined to save just so 
many of the human family as he foresaw could be induced to 
repent and embrace the gospel. I always put foreknowledge 
before the act of determination in the Divine Mind, though, 
strictly speaking, perhaps all the acts of God exist simulta- 
neously. Observe, I am not now attempting to prove that 
my views on election are correct, but simply that they have 
been uniform. I told the Committee of Conference at Port 
Gibson, that all I meant by the phraseology, that God from 
eternity predestinated a certain definite number of the human 
race to eternal life, such decree not being founded on the 
foresight of their faith and good works, was, that all mankind 
would not be saved, (in the sense in which that word is used 
in the New Testament ;) that consequently a definite part (de- 
finite to the divine mind) of the human family will finally be 
admitted to heaven ; and that such admission must be traced 
beyond their faith and good works, (the indispensable pre-re- 
quisites,) to the unmerited mercy of God through Christ. Yea, 
moderator, I was particular in making this explanation to the 
Committee before subscribing to the article on election pub- 
lished in your printed extracts, page the 61st. Whatever you 
may think, moderator, the religious community will ultimate- 
ly decide that you did me gross injustice by publishing my 



40 



subscription to that article, without mentioning, at the same 
time, that I made the above explanations to the Committee. 
According to that usage of words, which I made known to 
the Committee, what did I subscribe to in the article of election, 
as stated in your printed minutes ? Why simply to these two 
propositions: 1st. All mankind will not be saved? 2d. Salvation 
is of grace. These two propositions I have always embraced and 
taught during my settlement in New Orleans. The Commit- 
tee knew the peculiar meaning which I gave to the emphatic 
words in all the articles which I subscribed to at Port Gib- 
son ; I depended on them to defend my character from false 
rumours on this subject. I went upon the ground, that they 
would gladly avail themselves of every opportunity, and all 
the means in their power, to do me justice. I was not willing 
to admit that it would give pleasure to any member of your 
body to see me greatly and permanently injured. To wish 
evil to any person is the essence of malice. It will not do for 
the Committee to say that they do not remember of my mak- 
ing the explanations as above stated, for there are ample argu- 
ments to convince all candid and unprejudiced persons that 
their memory on the subject has been very faithful, as I shall 
attempt to show in the sequel. 

I have supposed, moderator, that you, as a Presbytery, are 
not so ignorant of the world as not to know that public men 
are especially obnoxious to misrepresentation and calumny. 
That profound and accurate observer of human affairs, Dr. 
Samuel Johnson, once remarked, that " it was more from 
** carelessness about truth, than from intentional lying, that so 
" much falsehood abounded in the world. Nothing but expe- 
" rience could evince," said he, " the frequency of false infor- 
" mation ; or enable any person to believe that so many 
" groundless reports should be propagated as every public man 
" may hear of himself. Some relate what they think, as what 
" they know ; some relate that to have happened, which they 
" want to have take place ; some men of confused memories 
" and habitual inaccuracy, ascribe to one what belongs to ano- 
" ther ; and some talk on, without thought or care. A few 
" persons are sufficient to broach falsehoods, which are after- 



41 



" wards innocently diffused by successive relaters." It is a 
melancholy fact, that, as an ecclesiastical tribunal, you have 
(I hope innocently) lent your names to give currency to those 
false rumours concerning the accused, which were set afloat 
by a small number of careless, talkative, inexperienced, and 
perhaps malignant enemies. When looking back upon the 
intercourse between the Presbytery and myself, many facts 
rise up to memory, which force on my mind the painful con- 
viction that you have indulged towards the accused most un- 
reasonable suspicions. I cannot help believing that you have 
been in the habit of comparing my solemn, explicit declara- 
tions as to doctrine and preaching, with mere hearsays ; as if 
rumour was the legitimate standard by which to test the vera- 
city of my Confessions of Faith and written avowals. 

How few persons are competent to pay a critical attention 
to an extemporaneous discourse, delivered with ordinary co- 
piousness and fluency. An extremely well-educated, cautious, 
discriminating clergyman told me, that on a certain occasion 
he delivered a sermon, written with great care, before one of 
the most enlightened audiences in New England. On his 
leaving the place of worship, a member of the church, distin- 
guished for intelligence and candour, expressed a wish to have 
some private conversation with him on a certain doctrine of 
the sermon which he conceived to be erroneous. In the 
course of the conversation, the minister discovered that this 
church member had understood him to deny the very propo- 
sition which he had laboured to establish ! Similar mistakes 
have occurred, with respect to the accused, during his resi- 
dence in New Orleans. Consider how many strangers flock 
to that city. They are seen once or twice in church. Can 
the hearing of one or two sermons enable them to form a 
judgment concerning my theology, which should have more 
weight on your minds than all my precise and solemn com- 
munications to the Presbytery respecting the same subject ? 

It is unpleasant, to the highest degree, to be treated with 
a distrust that pre-supposes, in the object of it, an utter dere- 
liction of wisdom and principle. It is unjust for any man, or 
body of men, to indulge a suspicious spirit, which amounts to 



42 



judging our neighbour's heart. To judge the heart, is the pre- 
rogative of God alone. Shall frail, erring man presume to 
make a decision on that which none but the Omniscient and 
Eternal One can comprehend ? Some ministers may have 
practised deception to obtain influence in the Presbyterian 
church ; I, Sir, for one, have not. Were I ever so unprin- 
cipled, no motive of a suitable nature and of sufficient mag- 
nitude has ever operated to incline me to duplicity for such a 
purpose. Influence in the Presbyterian church, as such, has 
never been with me an object of ambitious desire. Influence 
in the church of Christ appears to me of superlative import- 
ance as a means of usefulness. To facilitate schemes for 
doing good, is the strongest motive for my attaching myself to 
any particular denomination. 

It is one thing to use terms and phrases on any point of 
faith adapted to the comprehension of clergymen, and quite 
a different thing to employ language accommodated to the 
understanding of those not conversant with theological discus- 
sions. As I have already intimated, concerning the Calvinis- 
tic dogmas, much misconception has been produced by the 
want of precise and definite terms, such as are employed in 
the physical sciences. In the theological department, different 
persons use the same words in different senses when treating 
on the same subject. Again : they use different words to ex- 
press the same ideas. Hence arise misconceptions and disputes. 
Now, in some cases, during times gone by, I have varied my 
phraseology to meet the habits and taste of those whom I 
was addressing, without intending to intimate that I had in 
the slightest degree changed my opinions. In some instances, 
I have thought that the only difference between some respect- 
ed brethren and the accused was a verbal one ; therefore 
I have given up my phraseology for the sake of peace, and 
adopted that of my brethren, though it was not entirely ac- 
cordant with my taste. This change of language merely, has 
been misconstrued, by considering it as equivalent to a change 
of sentiment. 

In this way, the nature of the extracts published by the 
Presbytery last winter, put a plausible argument against me 



43 



into the hands of the superficial and ignorant. They thought, 
and perhaps correctly, that they saw me using, in that publica- 
tion, some terms on election and the Trinity which I had not 
customarily used when preaching on said subjects. What was 
the inference ? Why, perhaps it was this, — that I intended to 
equivocate, to become all things to all men, to vary my creed 
to suit the atmosphere around me. If so, the inference was 
most unjust. My object, in these quotations from my com- 
munications to the Presbytery which you have printed, was to 
convince my ministerial brethren that the New Haven school 
of divines, to which I professedly belonged, held a faith es- 
sentially pure. It is not correct, as stated by several members 
of the Presbytery, that the object of appointing a Committee 
to confer with me at Port Gibson was to ascertain whether 
my views were in accordance with yours. I proclaimed every- 
where ; in the streets, and on the house-tops and in the pul- 
pit, that my theology was that of the Hew Haven school. You 
announced to the public, and declared to me in private, that 
you belonged to the old sound Calvinistic school, headed by 
the venerable Dr. Green and others. We made no attempt 
in these particulars to harmonize. No, Sir ; you have publish- 
ed to the world an egregious blunder on this point, and that 
under all the solemnities of an oath. I will not say that you 
have intentionally made a misstatement ; but I will say, that, 
on reflection, you must be convinced of your error. At the 
commencement of the first interview between the Committee 
of Conference and the accused, the chairman of said Commit- 
tee remarked that they wished to ascertain simply whether 
I was free from the errors of Unitarianism and Universal- 
ism. " Convince us," said he, " that you are a Presbyterian 
" of the New School, and that will satisfy us : for I do not 
" think we should turn you out of the Presbytery for being a 
" new light, when there were so many new lights on the floor 
" of the last General Assembly." Not one word was said by 
me to the Committee, or to the Presbytery, to persuade them 
that I was a Calvinist, in the sense in which they knew that 
I employed the term. Such a thought did not once enter 
my mind. « We have heard," said the Committee of Con- 

8 



44 



ference to me at our first interview, " that you have denied 
" the divinity of our Saviour, the atonement, and the endless du- 
" ration of future misery." After convincing them that they 
had been misinformed, they expressed much gratification, and 
assured me that there were no formidable obstacles in the 
way of an amicable adjustment of our difficulties ; and that 
such would be the tenor of their report to the Presbytery. 
As to phraseology, I adopted that of the old school so far as 
I thought it could be done consistently with truth, and with- 
out intending to convey to the minds of my brethren any 
other ideas concerning Calvinism than those which I had uni- 
formly avowed and taught. I did this at the suggestion of 
the Committee, who told me that some of the older members 
were not only ignorant of the doctrines, but even of the im- 
port of the terms, adopted by the New Haven school of di- 
vines. 

A member of the Presbytery told me, that he thought the 
extracts from your minutes published last winter, would do 
me a great injury in New Orleans. Other members of the 
Presbytery were heard to express the same opinion. One 
went so far as to say, apparently in an exulting manner, just 
before your pamphlet issued from the press, that its circula- 
tion in Louisiana would blast my reputation for ever, or to 
that effect. Did you really think, gentlemen, that the publi- 
cation of that far-famed tract would exert such a deleterious 
influence upon me as to annihilate my reputation, and involve 
in absolute destruction my wife and children ? Then it would 
have been kind and christian in you to have withheld it from 
the public. The spirit of the precept, do as you would be 
done by, in that case would have required you to employ all 
the means in your power to have saved me from exposure, 
disgrace, and ruin. I stood alone. You were mostly unac- 
quainted with me, lived many hundred miles from me in an 
adjoining state ; and generally held your meetings at such 
times and places as rendered it impossible for me to be pre- 
sent. I do not say that you did this intentionally for my dis- 
advantage, but that it was, in fact, prejudicial to my interests. 
At Port Gibson, in October 1831, you appointed a Committee 



45 



So correspond with the accused on his theological views, to 
ascertain (as you say) whether it was proper to bring charges 
against him. This Committee, according to your own show- 
ing, did not make their final report until April 1832 ; but 
prior to this report, you step forth and publish to the world a 
meagre, partial, one-sided view of what had been done be- 
tween us at Port Gibson the October preceding, and the ca- 
tastrophe of which had not yet taken place. When I first 
heard of your intention, it only awakened my astonishment 
that you should have so little respect for yourselves as to think 
for a moment of presenting to the public an ex parte account 
of our troubles. I do not wish to give offence, but I cannot 
help thinking that the publication of those extracts, at the 
time, and under the circumstances, was unfair and dishonour- 
able. It was a Yankee trick, if any thing ever done by men 
not born in New England may with propriety be thus labelled. 
And, moderator, I will give you my reasons for making this 
last remark. The extracts published related to unfinished 
business. A difference subsisted between the Presbytery and 
the accused of many years' standing. It was then going on, 
according to your representation still undecided; consequent- 
ly a just and impartial account of it could not possibly, at that 
time, have been laid before the public The promulgation of 
a portion only of any controversy, dispute, or difference be- 
tween individuals or communities, is of necessity an ex parte 
statement. Even on the supposition that all which had tran- 
spired between the contesting parties up to a certain date 
should be fairly disclosed, there might be something remain- 
ing to be developed, which, if known, would give a new and 
unanticipated colouring to the whole affair. 

But in the case before us, not all was promulged which had 
taken place between us antecedently to the date of your pub- 
lication. There was a set of interrogatories proposed to the 
accused by the Committee of Conference at Port Gibson, and 
answered, not found in your printed extracts ; and which, had 
it not been for this trial, never would have seen the light of 
day. No mention is made in your pamphlet of my verbal 
communications to the Committee of Conference and to the 



4(5 



Presbytery ; not a syllable is lisped about the several di^ 
courses which the accused uttered at Port Gibson, in which 
he presented, in presence of the Presbytery, his views on all 
the common topics of theology ; nothing is said in your pam- 
phlet about several letters from the accused to the Chairman 
of the Committee of investigation, concerning the questions to 
which he subscribed at Port Gibson ; and which letters were 
received, and should have been on your records, prior to the 
first week in March, 1832, the date of the publication of the 
printed extracts. Why were all these particulars, and many 
others calculated to operate in my favour, assiduously sup- 
pressed ? Suppose, Sir, the Presbytery had commenced an 
inquisition as to the soundness of your faith, and before it was 
concluded, should come out and publish parts and parcels of 
their proceedings, in which all in your favour should be sup- 
pressed : would you not complain of the course as unparal- 
leled and unjust ? Sir, this part of your course will not bear 
investigation. I have two grounds of complaint, then, against 
you on this head : 1st. That you should have given to the 
world any publication concerning this controversy before it 
had been brought to a close. 2d. That the account which 
you actually made, was unfair, inasmuch as it did not correctly 
set forth the whole of the transactions between us prior to the 
date of its publication. You may persuade yourselves, mo- 
derator, that you were actuated by pure and conscientious 
motives ; I will not aver to the contrary. But how will an 
impartial and enlightened public decide with respect to this 
matter ? They will sift it to the bottom. They will thorough- 
ly comprehend it. They will form their opinions as to the 
motives by which you were influenced. 

Observe, that I have never had any objections to the pub- 
lishing of a true history of all our difficulties. What I am 
talking about now is, the impropriety of publishing the part of 
an unfinished investigation, and that part even incorrectly re- 
presented. 

You may say, that for years before, you had been in the 
habit of publishing, from time to time, extracts from your re- 
cords for the satisfaction of the several churches under your 



47 



spiritual Superintendence ; and that the one now under con- 
sideration was issued merely to communicate general intelli- 
gence as to your proceedings, and was not designed injurious- 
ly to affect the accused. Yes, moderator, you may say so : 
but who so dull as not to see the flimsiness of such an apolo- 
gy ? Had you ever before published a part of an unfinished 
investigation into the soundness of one's faith ? Never, Sir. 
This, on your part, was an unprecedented movement. State 
your precedent if you can. In addition, we remember the 
intimation from your friends in New Orleans, some days be- 
fore the tract reached there, that something was descending 
the river from Natchez, the arrival of which was hourly look- 
ed for, which would immediately cause Parson Clapp to give 
up the ghost, and consign him, without further delay, to the 
tomb of the Capulets. Whence came this sagacious conjec- 
ture? Aye, moderator, dost thou not know? The object of 
the pamphlet is written with a sunbeam on almost every page 
of it. 

Let us now look at the charges and specifications in nume- 
rical order. I am constrained to believe, that almost the en- 
tire importance which they possess arises from the very re- 
spectful attention paid to them by the Presbytery. Before 
the commencement of this trial they were floating in the at- 
mosphere like straws and feathers, — trifles light as a puff of 
empty air, — shadowy and unsubstantial things. You have 
given them " a local habitation and a name." Under the 
plastic power of your hands they have been made to assume 
something like a definite shape, and have had imparted to 
them what seems to many a real subsistence. With regard 
to some of the charges, their origin was indeed low ; so 
much so, that I think it was a great stooping on the part of 
the Presbytery to descend to pick them up, to purgate and 
dress them so skilfully as to enable them to assume, in the eyes 
of your superficial and sycophantic followers, an air of decent 
hostility to the accused. You will see, moderator, when it is 
too late, that you have taken the wrong course. You should 
have permitted those charges and specifications to have lain 
still in that slough where they were first discovered, — the ap- 



40 



propriate receptacle of things rotten, loathsome, and pestife- 
rous. What slough do I allude to, you may feel inclined to 
inquire ? I answer, the slough of public rumour 5 what in 
your book of discipline is called "fama clamosa" or a loud re- 
port. But many public rumours are too empty and filthy to 
merit the notice of a church judicatory. Such are those on 
which you have based charges against me. 

Besides, you heard loud reports in my favour ; quite as 
loud as those against me, and coming from an origin of the 
most respectable description. Now, it seems to me, that you 
might have set the favourable reports over against the unfa- 
vourable, and thus ascertained at a glance that the balance 
was in favour of the accused ; that the "fama clamosa" bear- 
ing auspiciously upon my interests, greatly preponderated over 
those of the opposite character. Unfavourable rumours, mo- 
derator, are circulated in this community concerning yourself 
and some other members of this body. Why do we not give 
to them the most serious notice, and instantly summon you to 
a trial? For the following reasons: — We reflect that you 
have enemies in this community, and that they may have re- 
ported, to your disadvantage, what is not true. Again, we 
reflect that there are favourable rumours about you. To use 
an algebraic metaphor, we call the latter positive, and the for- 
mer negative quantities. We subtract one from the other, 
and find that the affirmative quantities far exceed the nega- 
tive. Now, if the accused had been dealt with on the same 
equitable principles, this trial never would have taken place. 

I believe also, that if the Presbytery, or a Committee of 
the Presbytery, had visited New Orleans last winter, and with 
a spirit of peace and good-will met my friends and opposers 
in some public place ; patiently heard the statements of both 
parties ; compared them with candour and moderation ; pour- 
ed oil on the troubled billows ; set an example of forbearance, 
and fraternal kindness ; and made due allowances for the im- 
perfections of poor human nature ; you would have been able, 
in the space of a single day, to have reconciled apparently 
discrepant statements and truly discordant hearts : you might 
at that time have brought about a complete settlement, with- 



49 



out sacrificing the accused ; without sacrificing any body ; 
without injuring the church ; and without in the slightest de- 
gree compromising the interests of truth and holiness. How 
infinitely preferable such a course would have been to the 
one actually adopted ! But that would have left unaccom- 
plished what you seem to have set your hearts upon, — the ir- 
reparable injury and final overthrow of the accused. You 
had been heard to say, " We must cast off Mr. Clapp, at any 
"rate, cost what it may;" that is, I suppose, be it right or 
wrong. You first set a going some of the most unfavourable 
rumours about my doctrines and character ; you gave them 
the first impetus ; you put the ball in motion. Now you are 
solemnly convoked to decide whether the defamatory reports, 
which you yourselves originated and fanned into a flame, are 
indeed true. Admirable disinterestedness ! Surpassing mo- 
desty ! What a glorious prospect i^- opened to the accused of 
having impartial justice dealt out to him \ 

1st. You charge me with preaching against the doctrine of 
original sin. Now, it has been proved by the concurrent testi- 
mony of all the witnesses examined on this trial, that I have 
simply denied the doctrine, that Adam's personal sin is im- 
puted to each of his posterity, in such a manner that every 
child, as soon as it is born, is deserving of death, temporal, spi- 
ritual, and eternal, on account of Adam's transgression. That 
is, I have uniformly denied the literal imputation of Adam's sin 
to his posterity. How is it possible for any one to consider 
mankind as participating in the guilt of a sin which was per- 
petrated before they had existence ? But all the witnesses 
testify that the accused has uniformly avowed and taught this 
doctrine, — that in consequence of Adam's fall, all mankind, 
coming into existence destitute alike of sin and holiness, do 
become actual transgressors as soon as they are capable of 
it ; and that unless prevented by the grace of God, would go 
on sinning for ever, and consequently be for ever wretched* I 
do not believe it possible for a child to be guilty ; that is, to 
be deserving of punishment before it has knowingly and de- 
liberately transgressed the divine law. You deny the correct- 
ness of this position ; you aver that God might in justice inflict 



50 



an eternal punishment on those dying in infancy, because infants 
sinned and fell with Adam in his first transgression. Sinned 
and fell before they had a being ! How incredible ! Yet you 
complain bitterly of the accused because he has insinuated 
that you believe in the doctrine of infant damnation. You re- 
pel this insinuation as a slander. And how do you repel it 1 
Why, by saying that you do not hold that all dying in infancy 
will in fact be damned ; but that God would be just in damn- 
ing them. But a just infliction is compatible with the divine 
perfections and glory. Consequently God would do no in- 
justice, nothing wrong, nothing calculated to tarnish his 
lustre, were he to subject children departing this life prior 
to actual sin, to eternal torments on account of Adam's guilt 
being imputed to them. This conclusion you must adopt, or 
give up the position that infants may be justly damned for 
Adam's sin imputed. You do, then, believe in the doctrine, 
that infants deserve eternal misery because Adam's sin has 
been imputed to them. The reasoning by which you attempt 
to make your followers believe that you discard a doctrine so 
unscriptural and odious, is sophistical and disingenuous. Mo- 
derator, you should be perfectly frank and candid. Go to a 
mother in your congregation, and tell her, as she clasps to her 
bosom her infant of a week old, that, according to your views 
of God's perfections, He might in equity inflict eternal tor- 
ments upon this child on account of a sin committed by a re- 
mote progenitor five thousand years ago. If you believe it, 
say so. I reject it ; I can no more believe in it than in Athe- 
ism. If this amounts to heresy, set me down as an heretic. 
I would add, that my views on this and kindred themes have 
been fixed since the year 1822. 

2d. You charge me with denying the doctrine of the Holy 
Trinity ; yet all the witnesses testify that I have uniformly 
avowed my belief in the supreme divinity of the Son of God 
and the Holy Spirit. I have simply denied Tritheism ; that 
there are three persons, (meaning by person, a distinct sepa- 
rate agent) in the Godhead. I have uniformly told you, and 
I told the Committee of Conference appointed at Port Gib- 
son, that I did not use the word Trinity to denote three se- 



51 

parate agents,but to express these three facts;— that the Father 
is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. My 
views on this doctrine are substantially those of Professor 
Stuart, as laid down in an excursus to his deservedly cele- 
brated commentary on the Hebrews. You pronounce my 
views erroneous ; that is, you avow and teach that there are 
three separate, distinct agents in the Godhead. It is an in- 
controvertible position, that the doctrine of a plurality of se- 
parate and equal agents in the Divine Nature is polytheism. 
I am no polytheist, moderator ; the God whom I profess to 
honour and adore is a Unit, undivided and indivisible. 

3d. I am accused of teaching erroneous doctrines concern- 
ing the decrees of God. On this subject I simply deny supra- 
lapsarianism. You have said that I am wrong on this point ; 
of course I must infer that you are supralapsarians. But in 
this particular you admit that the majority of Presbyterian 
ministers are with me. Why then assail the accused ? All 
the testimony, in regard to this specification, goes to show only 
that I have uniformly denied the doctrine of unconditional 
election and reprobation. Does this amount to entire scep- 
ticism on the subject of Decrees ? Assuredly not. I believe 
that all the acts of God are in entire harmony with his eter- 
nal purposes. That he will finally save just as many as he 
originally intended to save, cannot be doubted. I further be- 
lieve that God will save as many as he can consistently ; that 
all will not be saved, because such an event would be an impos- 
sibility ; I mean a moral impossibility, not a physical one. You 
may inquire, why God could not as easily save all of the human 
race as a part of them ? My answer is, that I do not know ; 
Revelation does not explain the reason. But it seems to me that 
the perfections of the Deity demand that he should save as ma- 
ny as possible, in the same manner that the perfection of a good 
man's character requires that he should do all the good in his 
power and no evil. The simple fact, that God will not save all, 
shows that there is some insuperable obstacle in the way ; for it 
would amount to blasphemy to say, that God is determined 
to send a part of mankind to hell, when he might with perfect 
ease, and without encroaching on or sullying his perfections, 



52 



have qualified them for heaven. If sin and misery are an evil, 
must not God do all he can to destroy them ? 

4th. You accuse me of denying that a belief in the Divini- 
ty of Christ is essential to salvation. Now, Sir, what does 
all this amount to ? It is not pretended that I have denied the 
supreme divinity of the Son of God, but simply that I admit 
that there are pious persons among the Unitarians. If I were 
to say that a reception of the doctrine of the Trinity is essen- 
tial to salvation, would it not be virtually declaring, that in my 
opinion the salvation of a Unitarian is an impossibility ? Do 
we read in the Bible that none but Trinitarians will be ad- 
mitted to the kingdom of the Messiah ? Doctors Beecher, 
Woods, Miller, Dwight, and other venerable authors, admit 
the possibility of some Unitarians being saved ; but for a 
similar admission you denounce me, and seek to turn me out 
of the church. My opinion is, that the truth on this subject 
is important just so far as it has been revealed, and no further. 
But what does revelation say as to the divinity of Jesus ? We 
must each decide for ourselves. I will not denounce you, and 
rank you among the reprobate, simply because you differ from 
me in the interpretation of the Holy Scriptures on this or 
any other point. I have turned over the New Testament in 
vain to find the passages conferring the power on any body 
of uninspired men, whether belonging to the clergy or laity, 
to discipline, suspend, depose, or excommunicate a church 
member for denying the supreme divinity of the Son of God. 
The words, heretic and heresies, both in the historical parts of 
the New Testament and the Epistles, when importing any 
thing morally wrong, are employed to signify either an anti- 
christian spirit of turbulence, faction, and dissension ; or the 
holding of opinions known to be false, and taken up to gratify 
pride, ambition, covetousness, lust, or other evil passions. 
Macknight remarks, concerning the clause in Titus, 3. 11. Jin 
heretic is self-condemned, " that this could not be true if heresy 
" were merely an error of judgment. Being, therefore, a 
" voluntary error, it is reckoned among the works of the flesh, 
" Gal. 5. 20. and the heretic himself is to be marked and 
"avoided, Rom. 16. 17. Doctrines known to be false, taken 



53 



® up and spread from unhallowed purposes, are the only ones 
M that can be justly denominated heretical according to the 
" legitimate use of that epithet in the original Scriptures. But 

* if one is sincerely persuaded of the truth of the opinion he 
" has embraced, and if neither his worldly interest, nor the 

* gratification of his vicious inclinations, are thereby promoted, 
" his wrong opinion is his misfortune rather than his fault ; and 
" God, who knows the heart, will make the allowances which 
" are necessary in such a case." I quote from memory ; but 
I believe that I have presented the sentiments of that great 
man correctly. Moderator, such are my sentiments. You 
told me at Poft Gibson, in October 1831, that there was a 
canon or rule of the General Assembly, forbidding the ad- 
mission of any Unitarian to the Lord's table. I replied that 
I had never seen such a rule, and was not apprized of its ex- 
istence. If such is the case, I added, it is not consistent for 
a minister of the Presbyterian church to admit Unitarians to 
communion at the Lord's table. I so expressed myself to the 
Committee of Conference; yet I gave you to understand 
distinctly, that, in my private opinion, pious Unitarians had a 
right to the name and privileges of disciples, though by the 
conventional rules of the General Assembly they might be 
debarred from them. 

Here I would offer a remark or two on the averment of 
brother Chase (when giving his testimony), that I told him in 
conversation at my house in New Orleans, that there was not 
an unexceptionable argument in support of the divinity of the 
Saviour to be found in the New Testament ; and that at the 
same time and place I made a similar observation with re- 
spect to the atonement. These declarations I listened to with 
astonishment. There is not a particle of truth in them. In- 
deed, the entire account of this interview given by Mr. Chase, 
has not as much resemblance to reality as we ordinarily ex- 
pect to find in a caricature. The fact is, I remarked to Mr. 
Chase on that occasion, that I did not believe the divinity of 
Christ could be proved by the names and titles merely which 
are applied to Him in the New Testament ; that I had heard 
Professor Stuart make a similar remark. Mr. Chase went 



54 



from that interview to some of my church members, and told 
them that I had denied that the divinity of our Saviour and 
the doctrine of the atonement could be substantiated by any 
Scriptural arguments whatever. On the contrary, I told him 
that there were valid proofs in support of both to be drawn 
from Revelation. Those who have known me most intimate- 
ly for the last eleven years in New Orleans, say unanimously, 
both friends and foes, that they have never heard me broach 
any thing like the sentiments imputed to me by brother Chase. 
Nor did I tell him, on that occasion, that I corresponded with 
Mr. Stuart : nor did I tell him that I had received a call to 
settle over a Unitarian congregation. To be .sure, I did say 
that if the Presbytery succeeded in making the people of New 
Orleans believe that I was a Unitarian at heart, even this 
would not destroy me ; I should, nevertheless, have friends 
enough to fill one church. Mr. Chase did not report the con- 
versation correctly which took place between him and the 
accused at the house of Mrs. Robinson. I have the means 
of proving the truth of this assertion. In short, Mr. Chase's 
testimony, taken as a whole, is a complication of error, mis- 
statement, and misrepresentation ; which, for want of time, I 
cannot now unravel and expose. I intend, on some future 
occasion, to subject it to a rigid analysis. 

5th. I am charged with inculcating incorrect and danger-* 
ous views concerning the christian Sabbath. The testimony 
on this specification I am in the main satisfied with. The 
alarming rumours as to my departure from truth on the sub- 
ject of the Sabbath, originated in a very simple thing. 

One evening, at a Bible class in my session room, the ques- 
tion was propounded to me by some one, (I do not now recol- 
lect whom,) whether it was proper to teach children the 4th 
commandment of the decalogue. I replied no ; not in the 
exact form in which it is presented in the Old Testament, 
because there the injunction reads thus : remember every 
Saturday, or last day of the week, to keep it holy. This form 
of the precept, I remarked, was applicable to the Jews only ; 
but, under the christian dispensation, the command runs thus : 
remember the first day of the week, to keep it holy. Substi- 



55 



tute, said I, the word Sunday or Lord's day in the place of 
Sabbath, and the fourth commandment, as recorded in Exo- 
dus, is obligatory upon all who possess the Holy Scriptures. 
Before the Sabbath subsequent to this Bible class meeting 
arrived, it was reported through the city that Mr. Clapp had 
denied the obligation to observe the christian Sabbath. This 
anecdote furnishes a fair sample of the origin of those reports 
to my prejudice that have been so widely propagated. 

6th Specification ; you accuse me of denying the efficacy 
of intercessory prayer. All the witnesses whom you have 
examined on this particular, testify that they have never no- 
ticed any thing peculiar in my prayers, either on the Sabbath 
in the church, or in evening meetings. They agree that I 
have been in the habit, ever since my settlement in New Or- 
leans, of making prayers and intercessions for all men ; that 
they might lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and 
honesty. This is sufficient to prove the baseless nature of the 
specification. In the winter of 1830, I attended a weekly 
prayer meeting in my session room, at which some individual 
arose and remarked, that it was clear to his mind that those 
who statedly met in that place could not be sincere in their 
prayers, could not offer the prayer of faith ; because their 
prayers were not answered, because there was no revival of 
religion in New Orleans. This Jed to a discussion on the na- 
ture and duty of intercessory prayer. The accused admitted 
that it was the bounden duty of christians to pray for the con- 
version of the world, — to offer supplications for all mankind ; 
but that we had no ground for concluding that our prayers 
were not acceptable to God because they were not imme- 
diately answered. Does not (I inquired) the Saviour offer 
prayers for the conversion of the world ? Are they not sin- 
cere ? Then, why is not the whole human family immediately 
regenerated ? To this I subjoined the remark, that we were 
not able to tell how our prayers could be instrumental in 
drawing down blessings upon the heathen nations and indivi- 
duals at a distance from us. But the efficacy of intercessory 
prayer I did not deny. The quo mo do, or way in which our 
prayers are efficacious, in calling down the divine favour upon 



those of our fellow-beings beyond the reach of our personal 
influence, has never, said I, been made known to us. Shortly 
after this meeting, it was reported that I had denied the effi- 
cacy of intercessory prayer. I traced the report to its origi- 
nators, viz. Rev. Silas Hazard, Mrs. Margaret M'Nair, and 
Mrs. Ann Davison. I assured them, individually, that they 
had entirely misconceived the nature of my remarks ; I con- 
tradicted the report in the pulpit. But still the two ladies 
above-mentioned persisted in repeating the rumour, after my 
explicit and solemn disavowal of it both in private and public. 
Their reasons for such a course are best known to themselves ; 
of the propriety of it there can be but one opinion among 
candid, liberal, and enlightened christians. 

With respect to the testimonies of Dr. Rollins, Dr. Moore, 
Mr. Roblins, Thomas Smith, William Caldwell, Mr. Franklin, 
Mrs. Hearsey, Mrs. M'Nair, and some others, I would remark, 
that they are made up of scraps and parts of sentences and 
trains of reasoning which, according to their own account, 
they listened to a long time ago. None of these witnesses 
can pretend to a tolerable acquaintance with the terms and 
technicals of theological science. Most of them had not heard 
me preach for eighteen months or two years before the time 
when they were called on to testify. Without miraculous 
aid, we could not expect them to be sufficiently accurate to 
entitle their statements to much consideration. Few persons 
possess a memory sufficiently strong and retentive to be able 
to recall the words and arguments of a discourse to which they 
listened but a day, week, or month ago. You have called on 
witnesses, who have received but a common education, to per- 
form what they are not competent to do without miraculous 
assistance. You ask them to state the words and phrases 
which were uttered by the accused in their presence two 
years ago or more. Now, suppose them to be ever so ho- 
nest, they could not comply with your request ; at the best, 
they could only give you their impressions. But these im- 
pressions might be altogether false : especially will this hold 
true with respect to discourses on the abstruser topics of Chris- 
tianity. 



hi 



In addition to these considerations, reflect that the above- 
mentioned individuals have for a long time, as is matter of 
public notoriety, been my strong personal enemies. They 
have had a hand in starting and keeping alive the calumnies 
that you are now condescending to notice. From time to 
time they have told you doleful tales about the accused, and 
you have called on them to swear that these tales are true. 
You know, Sir, that these persons wish to injure me ; you 
know that they feel the highest interest in convincing you, and 
the religious public generally, that they are very wise, good, 
and orthodox ; that consequently the accused is very unwise? 
sinful, and heretical. Without casting any reflections upon 
their general integrity, I ask, what, under the circumstances 
just enumerated, is their testimony worth ? How much should 
it weigh in your impartial estimation ? You, Sir, would not 
like to have one go to your personal enemies for an account 
of your character and doings. Indeed, such a course is ridi- 
culously absurd. Yet you speak of the declarations of these 
enemies of mine, as if they possessed the character of unan- 
swerable and conclusive arguments ! You say that we know 
such and such things to be facts. I call for the evidence ; 
you refer me to the say so, — the ipse dixit, of Dr. Rollins, 
Mr. Caldwell, or Mrs. M'Nair. This ends the matter. " Quod 
erat demonstrandum est." 

Against the assertions of this famous coterie, I am defended 
by a cloud of witnesses of the most brilliant and exalted re- 
putation. Many of them have been liberally educated ; are 
familiar with the different theological systems ; and are there- 
fore competent judges concerning the subjects, with respect 
to which they have attempted to give testimony. Take as a 
sample, Alfred Hennen, Esquire ; he reads the original Scrip- 
tures ; is an elder in our church ; has been one of my constant 
hearers for years past ; is conversant with the whole range of 
biblical literature ; and with regard to whose ardent piety 
there seems to be but one opinion in New Orleans. Should 
not his testimony weigh as much with you as that of Doctor 
Rollins ? Several clergymen have testified in my behalf, of 
different denominations, who have often heard me preach with- 



58 



in the last two years. Suppose a question was to be decided 
about the merits of some production of the fine arts ; would not 
the connoisseur be able to give a truer opinion than one not at 
all an adept in such matters ? Even as to facts, some are 
better qualified to give testimony than others. Yet it seems 
to me that you have been more influenced by what has been 
conveyed to you by a few ignorant, gossipping enemies, than by 
the lucid and potent testimonies of respectable clergymen and 
laymen. It should be remembered that a multitude more of 
witnesses might have been brought to establish the points es- 
sential to my defence if you would have consented to examine 
them. Should not the majority in this, as in other matters, 
decide ? Is it not most probable that the minority is in error ? 
As to competency and number of witnesses, the testimony 
in my favour infinitely outweighs that which is against me, 
if any such there be. Does not this amount to a virtual ac- 
quittal ? 

I desire to offer a word or two as to the tenor of my 
preaching on the subject of creeds. I have never objected 
to the utility of creeds, as definite expressions of what in our 
view the Scriptures contain. I have reprobated what seemed 
to me the undue and dangerous importance attached by many 
to merely human standards of faith ; and on such occasions 
have sometimes remarked, that if all our Confessions of Faith 
were annihilated, it would, in all probability, promote the uni- 
ty, peace, and advancement of the church of Christ ; for, in 
that case, probably all denominations would agree to adopt 
that brief summary of christian doctrine which is called the 
apostle's creed. To prevent misapprehension, I will rehearse 
this creed : " I believe in God, the Father Almighty, maker 
" of heaven and earth : and in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our 
" Lord ; who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the 
" virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, 
" dead and buried ; the third day he arose again from the dead, 
" ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God, 
" the Father Almighty ; from thence he shall come to judge the 
" quick and the dead ; I believe in the Holy Ghost, the holy 
" catholic church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of 



59 



« sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. 
" Amen." There has been no time during my ministry that 
I could not have subscribed " ex anima" to this creed ; and 
I have for years expressed the opinion, that all who can with 
sincerity subscribe to it, are qualified for admission to the sa- 
crament of the Lord's Supper, provided there is nothing ob- 
jectionable in their moral and religious deportment. 

Under the 2d general charge, you accuse me, 

1st. Of having made slanderous statements in relation to 
sundry brethren in the ministry. 

Moderator, what is slander ? Shall Elackstone answer the 
question ? You say there is no objection, in the minds of this 
court, to receiving my definition. I am glad to hear you say 
so. Blackstone says, " that slander is a false report, tending 
" to injure the reputation of another, by lessening him in the es- 
" teem of his fellow-citizens ; by exposing him to impeachment 
" and punishment ; or by impairing his means of living.'' To 
slander a person, then, is to injure or tarnish his reputation by 
false reports, maliciously uttered or propagated. 

The amount of the first specification, therefore, under the 
2d charge, is, that I have injured the reputation of the mem- 
bers of the Mississippi Presbytery, by maliciously uttering or 
propagating false reports concerning them. This subject was 
amply discussed in my letters to the Rev. George Potts, chair- 
man of the Committee of Investigation, which have been read 
to you, and were, nearly a year ago, placed upon your records. 
Therein I observe, " that before my supposed separation 
" from your body, and since my re-union, I have spoken of you, 
" I believe, uniformly in an affectionate, respectful, and ehris- 
" tian style. But how have the members of the Presbytery 
" spoken of me ? Have they said nothing harsh, disrespectful, 
" and unbrotherly ? If, in my language towards the Presbytery, 
" I have violated any christian rule, it is matter of deep re- 
" gret to me. For any such delinquency I hope to be forgiven." 
On this subject I made to you the overtures alluded to in these 
words of Scripture: "If thy brother trespass against thee, 
" go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone ; if he 
" shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. If thy brother 

10 



60 



" trespass against thee, rebuke him; if he repent, forgive him $ 
" and if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven 
" times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent, thou shalt 
"forgive himP I said to you, my brethren, " I may on some oc- 
" casions have spoken of you in unjustifiable language. If so, 
I am willing to make all due acknowledgments ; if so, I ask 
for forgiveness in the spirit and on the terms of the gospel of 
Christ Look into this business," said I, " and see if it can- 
" not be adjusted in an amicable manner." Yet, after this 
respectful and conciliatory overture, you charge me with 
slander ; you pay no attention to my solicitation ; but you go 
upon the ground that in this particular I am utterly refracto- 
ry and contumacious. Is there another Presbytery in the 
United States which would have conducted in this manner ? 

Let us now look attentively at that language of mine which 
has been denominated slander. Does it appear in evidence 
that I have uttered or propagated a false report concerning 
you? I have said that you were fallible men, liable to err ; 
and that in some instances I believed you had erred. Was 
this false ? During the time of my supposed separation from 
your body, I asserted that you had turned me out of the Pres- 
byterian church against my consent, and without the benefit 
of a trial. Was this false ? I said I considered such a course 
in violation of the plainest dictates of justice and the princi- 
ples of our church constitution. Does this amount to slan- 
der? 

For a few days after 1 first heard of the manner in which 
you saw fit to dispose of my letter of March 5th, 1830, 1 de- 
clared, in strong and expressive language, my views of your 
proceedings. I am not sanguine enough to expect that you 
will credit the statement which I am now about to make ; 
nevertheless it is true. The first feelings awakened by the 
intelligence of my ejection from the Presbytery without a 
trial, were not of an angry, resentful, or melancholy character. 
The news both surprised and diverted me. I could not help 
recalling to mind the trite metaphors, " Tempest in a tea-pot," 
" Ocean into fury wrought, to waft a feather or to drown a 
" fly. 5 ' I did not then believe that you would persevere in the 



61 



course adopted. I thought, that in the space of a few weeks 
or months your eyes would be opened to see the injustice of 
the measures adopted in my case, so that you would abandon 
them of your own accord, and either restore me my place in 
the Presbytery or give me the benefit of a fair and impartial 
trial. Such were my feelings. I do not now say that my 
feelings were correct, appropriate to the occasion. Take the 
ground that they were wrong and absurd if you please ; still 
you must see, that, with such feelings as I had, I must have 
been much more inclined to be facetious than serious on the 
subject. Such, really, was the fact. I was not disposed to 
make wrathful expressions about your proceedings, but to speak 
lightly of them, to ridicule them. 

Now, it is well known among my intimate acquaintances, 
that when conversing on what seems to me to be the incor- 
rect or absurd opinions, measures, or conduct of individuals 
admitted by myself to possess wisdom and worth, I have a 
peculiar way of denouncing such opinions, measures, and con- 
duct, in an hyperbolical style ; a style which, if understood 
literally, would be condemned as coarse, harsh, and abusive. 
For example : after commenting on actions that appeared to 
me unjust or absurd, I have been in the habit of saying to 
the friend I was conversing with, " Do you not think that 
" was acting a scoundrelly, or low, or base part ? On such oc- 
casions the catastrophe has usually been a smile, with the un- 
derstanding on all sides that I had been using the language 
of facetiousness and hyperbole. Say, if you please, that such 
a style of conversation is derogatory to a clergyman, anti- 
clerical, and puerile. Condemn it with as much severity as 
you please. Extenuate nothing ; set down nothing in malice ; 
but let not mere sportiveness be regarded as the effusion of a 
malicious and unprincipled heart. I do not believe that I have 
ever conversed in the before-mentioned style about the mem- 
bers of the Mississippi Presbytery among strangers. I re- 
member that, in conversation with Mrs. M'Nair, I once re- 
marked that the members of the Mississippi Presbytery, 
I doubted not, thought they had been doing a duty in turning 
me out of their body without a trial; but that it seemed strange 



62 



to me that good men should have acted thus. " Madam," said 
I, " do you not think they have acted a scoundrelly part using 
the word in the facetious manner before alluded to. I have 
not seriously spoken against the Presbytery in as severe terms 
as I have not unfrequently heard that lady herself use about 
them. This, to be sure, is nothing to the point ; but I will 
say a word illustrative of my relation to this lady. 

The husband of Mrs. M'Nair was, until a recent period (as 
you know), an elder of the First Presbyterian church, New 
Orleans. I visited the family often, and was on the most in- 
timate, friendly, and confidential terms with them. Mrs. 
M'Nair and myself sometimes conversed about persons, per- 
haps with too much levity and freedom. Be this as it may, I 
often went from my study to her drawing-room to enjoy the 
refreshment of easy, unrestrained, and confidential intercourse 
with a lady, who, as I supposed, recognized the ordinary ties 
of politeness and the sacred obligations of christian civility. 
Little did I then think that every unguarded or imprudent ex- 
pression which I might let fall, in unreserved and familiar con- 
versation with her, would be treasured up, and afterwards re- 
peated, with many additions, exaggerations, and discolourings, 
in order to fix upon me the imputation of slander. What, 
however, I did not then suspect, has actually occurred. If 
all should violate the confidence reposed in them in a similar 
manner, the ties of civilized society would soon be sundered. 
I shall not retaliate, though I might do it with prodigious ef- 
fect ; my principles forbid it. Besides, I have an affectionate 
regard for her generous and noble-minded husband. Mr. 
Timothy Pickering once asked governor Morris for an account 
of something that had been said to him in private discourse 
by Mr. Jefferson : he replied, " it would be indelicate in me 
" to bring forward, publicly, the conversation which Mr. Jef* 
" ferson held with me, for he certainly could not have intend- 
" ed it for the public ; and whatever may have been, or may 
" be, his conduct towards me or my friends, there is, 1 think, 
" a sanctity of social intercourse among gentlemen which ought 
" not to be violated." Again : on another occasion, I told you 
before, as 1 feel myself bound to tell you now, that although the 



63 



information I received was not expressly under the seal of 
confidence, yet it was that sort of conversation, where, among 
gentlemen, there is so much confidence implied, that it would 
be indelicate to cite facts, unless, perhaps, to eulogize another 
after his death. Happy would it be for the church of Christ 
if all its members were as conscientious and particular about 
disclosing confidential communications or conversations as 
this great man appears to have been. 

But several members of my church have been urged to vio- 
late the sanctity of social intercourse, and that by members of 
your body. Several of the brethren have visited New Or- 
leans at different times during the two past years, and, in the 
capacity of inquisitors, have searched one fire-side after ano- 
ther for the gossip constituting the raw materials out of which 
the charges and specifications against me have been manufac- 
tured. Noble employment ! If the brethren had but suspect- 
ed the estimation in which they were held on account of this 
conduct, not only in Louisiana but among their own people, 
they would not have commenced this trial. " Quern Deus 
" vult perdere, priusquam dementat." 

One witness testifies, perhaps more, that the accused, when 
speaking of your proceedings in turning him out of the Pres- 
bytery without a trial, alleged that you had acted like asses. 
Now, admit that I uttered these words, would it deserve the 
epithet slanderous ? Slander, in the first place, according to 
the definition we have agreed on, is a false assertion. The 
word ass is employed in colloquial style to denote a dull, 
heavy, stupid man. The amount, then, of the declaration is, 
that on a certain occasion your actions resembled those of men 
of dull and obtuse intellect. Are you prepared, moderator, 
to say that this is a false declaration ? Indeed, the wisest men 
living have sometimes acted like asses, that is, unwisely. Pro- 
fessor Miller of Princeton admits that Presbyterian ministers, 
in their assemblies, often make hasty, petulant, ostentatious, 
retaliating, and passionate speeches. He admits that eccle- 
siastical judicatories often adopt unwise measures, or act fool- 
ishly ; that is, like asses. Surely the Doctor should be arraign- 



64 



ed before the Presbytery to which he belongs on the charge 
of slandering his brethren. 

Nor can you say that the words were maliciously uttered. 
Indeed, the testimony favours, and, I think, establishes the po- 
sition, that in the opinion of witness I was only indulging a 
facetious humour when I alluded to you as belonging to the 
asinine family. To be sure, often truth is presented in the 
form of a jest ; but I solemnly aver, moderator, that I have 
never said that you acted like asses to gratify malicious feel- 
ings. With all my faults, on this point I am above suspicion. 
My most violent opposers in New Orleans concede that ma- 
lice is not my besetting sin. 

Nor can you say that my language, in regard to your pro- 
ceedings, has tended to lessen you in the esteem of your fellow- 
citizens, to expose you to punishment, or to impair your means 
of living. Are you not as much respected now as you ever 
were ? But if you stand lower in the public estimation than 
at some former period, is the accused the cause of it ? Cer- 
tainly I have done nothing to expose you to impeachment or 
punishment ; it cannot be said that I have impaired your 
means of subsistence, for you do not depend (at any rate most 
of you do not depend) on your professional pursuits for a liv- 
ing. Should I make this whole community believe that you 
were dull, stupid men, it would not impoverish the soil of your 
plantations, nor destroy your slaves, nor diminish the annual 
amount of your cotton crops. No, in this particular you are 
above the reach of your enemies. It cannot, then, be said 
with truth, that the objectionable language imputed to me has 
any of the signs of slander by which we have agreed to be 
guided in this investigation. I have said nothing about you 
that is false, or that has seriously tended to lessen your repu- 
tation or to impair your means of living. 

Let it not be forgotten, that whatever improper language 
was said by the accused concerning the Presbytery, it was 
uttered at a time when I believed that I was no longer a 
member of your body ; that I had been seriously injured by 
you ; and that I might with perfect propriety express my 
views of the nature and magnitude of this injury. Is it kind, 



65 



fair, or benevolent, to found a charge on any rash or unguarde 
ed expressions uttered under such circumstances ? 

Besides, the opprobrious epithets imputed to me were ap- 
plied to your actions, not to your persons. I draw a line of 
discrimination between actions and agents. I think it proper 
to say of the actions of my brethren, that they are wrong, or 
unjust in their tendency, (if I really think so) provided that I 
do not impugn their motives. Ministers of the Gospel belong 
to the public. We criticise their manners, opinions, sermons, 
character, elocution, and conduct, with the same freedom that 
we inquire into the merits of any literary production. We 
may decide that such a thing is right or wrong, prudent or 
imprudent, in a minister's course, without being chargeable 
with the sin of slandering him. To point out what we believe 
to be meritorious or otherwise in a brother's conduct, is not 
defamation. I deny that I have ever applied abusive epithets 
to my ministerial brethren in a slanderous manner, so as is 
calculated to lessen their reputation or to impair their means 
of subsistence. But were it otherwise, I disclaim the propri- 
ety of affixing to the names of our fellow-christians uncivil 
and abusive epithets. Is not this enough ? 

Mr. Robbins testifies that I told him in his house that I 
knew enough of Mr. Potts' character to ruin him. Mrs. 
M'Nair affirms that I told her that I could relate things about 
Mr. Potts that would injuriously affect his standing in the minds 
of individuals in this city. The testimony of Mrs. M'Nair has 
much more of truth in it than that of Mr. Robbins. I deal 
not in the dark hints and empty menaces of a bravado. 4 What 
I said to Mr. Robbins and Mrs. M'Nair may be thus express- 
ed : — Speaking of the assaults which the Presbytery had made 
on my character, I said, that if I were disposed to create trou- 
ble and to retaliate, I could make an exposition, which, in the 
opinion of an impartial mind, would bear injuriously on the 
characters of Messrs. Potts and Montgomery ; that I could 
bring quite as plausible charges against them as those which 
they sought to prove against the accused. Perhaps no two 
ministers were ever intimately acquainted for a number of 
years without discerning in each other defects which might 



66 



be emblazoned to their mutual injury. But let me tell you 
what I was alluding to. With Mr. Montgomery I was never 
intimately acquainted. Before he had ever been introduced to 
me, or had ever heard me preach, he stated, in a piece that was 
published in the Western Luminary and also the Philadel- 
phian, that Mr. Clapp denied the grace of God in the conver- 
sion of the soul ; that is, denied the influences of the Holy Spi- 
rit in regeneration. Mr. Montgomery did not sign his name 
to this libellous production, but I traced it to him, and forced 
him to acknowledge that he was the author. I asked him 
how it was possible for him deliberately to publish such an 
untruth about me ? He replied, that he considered my deny- 
ing that the unrenewed were utterly unable to repent and be- 
lieve, was equivalent to denying the influences of the Holy 
Spirit in regeneration. Now, Mr. Montgomery knew well, 
that all that class of divines to which I belong deny physical 
inability, but do cordially subscribe to the doctrine of the 
influences of the Holy Spirit in conversion. I assured him 
that I not only embraced the doctrine, but loved it ; and that 
it had always been uppermost in my creed and preaching. I 
begged him to publish a recantation, or in some manner to 
make me suitable reparation ; this he refused to do. If John 
L. Montgomery had issued an handbill stating that I had ab- 
jured all religion and become an Atheist, he would not have 
deviated farther from truth than he did in the statement ac- 
tually made by him. And the publication also was most inju- 
rious in its tendency. Fix upon me, moderator, any conduct 
half as reprehensible, and I will agree that you may condemn 
me as a slanderer. 

And yet this individual is one of the prosecuting Committee ! 
What will the religious public say when they come to the 
knowledge of these facts ? You employ an individual who 
has deliberately calumniated me, to prove charges, one object 
of which is to show that I am so depraved that he who ex- 
poses me to public odium is doing God service. Will the 
higher judicatories of the church look on and sanction such 
oppression ? 

One word here as to what I meant by saying that I could 



67 



make a statement as to Mr. Potts which would injuriously 
affect his character. During the year 1829, a long and con- 
fidential intercourse was carried on between the accused and 
the Rev. George Potts of Natchez. Mr. Potts had promised not 
to show these letters to any one without my permission. On 
March 5th, 1830, 1 addressed two letters to Mr. Potts, the one 
a private epistle, the other to be sent to the Presbytery at 
their next session. Observe, that it was not until months after 
this date that the injunction of secrecy imposed, as to our cor- 
respondence, was removed. In April, 1830, 1 heard that my 
private confidential letters had been sent to Presbytery during 
their session in the beginning of April 1830, by Mr. Potts, 
without my knowledge or consent. At first I did not credit 
the report, believing it impossible that Mr. Potts could be 
guilty of such a breach of confidence. Subsequently I was 
compelled, by additional information, to suspect that he had 
betrayed me. I immediately wrote to him on the subject. 
In reply, he says : " the changes in your sentiments communi- 
* cated to me as your personal friend, and under the injunction 
" of confidence, were therefore never communicated, (meaning 
" to Presbytery). So far as your private and confidential com- 
" munications with me are concerned, it is evident that they can- 
" not be considered as communications of an official nature held 
M with the Presbytery ; and when Mr. Smylie, in his letter to 
"you, spoke of several letters of your's which were at the meet- 
" i>ng °f th e Presbytery, did you not immediately suspect me of 
" breach of promise or perjury, and so speak of me to brother 
" Chase when in New Orleans ? The letters which Mr. Smylie 
" referred to were the two last which you wrote." 

Surely, moderator, I did suspect him of a breach of pro- 
mise, and I suspected what was true, as appears by his own 
acknowledgment. He admits that he sent my two last letters 
to the Presbytery ; but one of these was a private, confiden- 
tial letter ; the other I intended him to show to the Presby- 
tery. But he did more : three of my last letters to Mr. Potts 
were sent to the Presbytery at their session in April 1830 ; 
which fact was extorted from Mr. Potts when under the so- 
lemnities of an oath. One of these he was authorized to 

11 



68 



send, and only one. He sent three, but he said he sent only 
two. How many more than three he sent will never be known 
to the accused in this world, as he had no friends at that 
meeting of the Presbytery. Mr. Potts, in his letter to the 
accused of May 18, 1830, affirms that my private and con- 
fidential letters were not communicated by him to the Pres- 
bytery. In his testimony before you this week, he admits 
that he did send two of my private, confidential letters to the 
Presbytery in 1830. Here is a flat contradiction. But Mr. 
Potts says in his testimony, " that he has avowed to the ac- 
" cused and others f his belief that con fidential intercourse be- 
(t tween individuals was to be limited by circumstances / that 
" duty to the church, of which we were both ministers, was im- 
"perative, and forbade the concealment of the knowledge of any 
u fact which threatened injury to its interests. Upon this prin- 
" ciple he has acted and intends to act. The obligations of 
il private friendship, when they run counter to the obligations of 
" the minister of Christ, must give way." That is, his obli- 
gations to me as a friend, required that he should conceal 
the letters ; his obligations to the church demanded that he 
should disclose them : consequently the duties of friendship 
and piety may be contradictory. But why, after disclosing 
the letters, did he deny it ? By disclosing the letters he vio- 
lated a sacred promise, but says he was justifiable, because 
the interests of the church demanded said violation. The in- 
terests of the church, Sir, demand the violation of a promise, 
the utterance of a falsehood ? None but the Jesuits would 
advocate such a corrupt principle. 

In answer to the following question, proposed by me to Mr. 
Potts during his examination, viz. " Will witness state why 
" he selected two letters only, and did not send the whole of 
" my private letters to Presbytery?" he remarks, "witness 
" would repeat, that these letters were sent for the private satis- 
"faction of the brethren, and not to be finally laid before them 
" in session ; and the reason why he selected these two letters 
£ was this : he believed that the previous correspondence of the 
" accused up to about the year 1829, would not furnish a fair 
" exhibition of the state of Mr. Clapp's views and feelings at 



69 



u the time of his request to be dismissed?' So then Mr. Potts 
sent these letters to furnish the Presbytery with a fair exhibition 
of my views and feelings ; and at the same time he tells us that 
he did not intend to lay them before the Presbytery finally. 
Who can comprehend this ? He sends private letters to the 
Presbytery to acquaint them with my change of views and feel- 
ings that had taken place since about the beginning of the year 

1829, (near the time, you will remark, of the opening of our con- 
fidential correspondence ;) and yet in his letter to me, May 18th, 

1830, he affirms that the changes in my sentiments, commu- 
nicated to him as a personal friend, and under the injunction 
of secrecy, during 1829 and part of 1830, had not been com- 
municated to the Presbytery ; a flat contradiction again. Sir, 
the only way in which Mr. Potts attempts to get out of this 
difficulty, is, by saying that the letters were not communicat- 
ed to the Presbytery, but to the members of the Presbytery ; 
that is, because they were not addressed to the moderator 
in his official capacity, they were not communicated at all. 
This part of brother Potts' conduct is indefensible. I will not 
say that he is a bad man, for good men may sometimes faul- 
ter ; but I ask, what is there, in all my intercourse with the 
Presbytery, that will suffer or appear dark in comparison with 
this transaction ? Yet Mr. Potts is one of my accusers, one of 
the witnesses against me, and one of my judges ! How ridicu- 
lous ! With these facts before you, can you say that it was 
improper for me to affirm that I could make a statement that 
would injuriously affect Mr. Potts' character ? 

Mrs. M'Nair affirms that I gave it as my opinion that Mr. 
Potts' talents were overrated, and that he could not sustain 
himself six weeks among an intelligent people. 

She has forgotten some of that conversation. We were 
speaking of the estimation in which Mr. Potts was held in 
Natchez, and of the fact that his people thought him superior 
to any of the Northern ministers. I remarked, that among an 
enlightened people Mr. Potts would not sustain the reputa- 
tion of being a first-rate man, as to talents, after they had heard 
him preach six weeks. Was this slander ? 

Here permit me to remind you how often I have been 



70 



spoken disrespectfully of, and even denounced, by members of 
the Presbytery, as devoid of piety, consistency, principle, and 
common honesty. I plead not the improper conduct of others 
in justification of any wrong that I may have said or done ; 
but still, it may not be irrelevant, Sir, to ask you to call to 
mind the harsh and severe things which have been said and 
written about me by several members of your body. I refer, 
too, to assertions which I know to be utterly false. I do not 
say that the persons who made them knew, at the time, and 
believed them to be utterly false ; I do not now impeach 
their sincerity. Suppose I were to give you a faithful picture 
of the misrepresentations and falsehoods which have been 
propagated to my injury : it would insure me, I am certain, 
at least your commiseration ; it would compel you to feel that 
I am more sinned against than sinning ; that I have been 
really and dreadfully persecuted. 

But during this trial, moderator, you have often inquired 
why professors of religion should so misrepresent and abuse 
me ? What has induced them to treat me so injuriously ? 
These questions can be answered. I admit that my imper- 
fections are so great and numerous, that christians have dis- 
cerned in me much that is really censurable. Again, I have 
felt it to be my duty to point out, and animadvert with great 
freedom and plainness, upon the faults of professing christians 
from the pulpit. The discharge of this duty has made many 
of them unfriendly to me. 

But again : suppose, Sir, that I had a Presbytery to back 
me, and that under their sanction I should write from New 
Orleans to some member of Mr. Potts' church at Natchez, 
stating that there was good reason to suspect Mr* Potts' sin- 
cerity ;' that the church should be on their guard against him ; 
that melancholy facts had compelled me to apprehend that he 
was a wolf in sheep's clothing ; devoid of piety ; actuated by 
pride and worldly ambition ; aiming, under the holy garb of 
orthodoxy, to undermine the faith of his church members ; and 
before they were aware of what was going on, by gentle and 
unsuspected means to clap on them the fetters of dangerous 
heresy. Suppose, further, that I should refer in this epistle to 



71 



certain specious but inconclusive arguments to give an air of 
plausibility to my representations. Suppose, that for a length 
of time I should continue to write such letters ; and that in 
the fit, appropriate season, I should visit the church at Natchez, 
#nd go from house to house to warn them against their artful 
and insidious pastor ; and suppose, that on their inquiring of 
me what there was in Mr. Potts' character and preaching of 
.such a dangerous tendency, instead of giving a definite an- 
swer, I should put off the interrogatories with general decla- 
rations and dark hints, accompanied with the suitable looks 
and actions calculated to make the impression that there was 
something awfully wrong about my brother, the disclosure of 
which, prudence for the present forbade. Suppose, also, that 
my ministerial brethren were to assist me in carrying on this 
drama, that they should perform the deeds just specified in 
the respective spheres of their influence ; blackball Mr. Potts 
in secret ; send epistles throughout the Union, declaring him 
an apostate at heart, and unworthy the confidence of the 
churches. Suppose, further, that all Mr. Potts' protestations 
of innocence should be uniformly met by my saying, in con- 
junction with the whole Presbytery, that he could not be relied 
on ; that he would subscribe to any creed, even that of 
Mahomet, to accomplish his ends ; and that he was no more 
to be trusted than the idle winds. Also imagine this species 
of warfare to be carried on against Mr. Potts for several 
years. Under these circumstances, what, think you, would 
become of our poor brother ? Would he not be completely 
done up, as they say in Kentucky 1 Would not the tempest 
overpower him, at least for a time ? No matter how con- 
spicuous his talents, piety, grace, or previous usefulness ; these 
would not prevent his suffering. Mankind are weak ; and the 
united testimony of a whole Presbytery would, for a time, 
sweep away, as chaff before the whirlwind, all the fortifica- 
tions of truth and argument that he might erect in his defence. 
And lastly, suppose, that after accomplishing my nefarious 
scheme to render this brother an object of suspicion and cen- 
sure in the religious community, I should further insult him 
by asking, with a sort of satanic smile, how it happened that 



72 



christians talked so much against him ? The application of 
these remarks, Sir, is obvious. " Verbum sat sapienti." 

The 2d and 3d specifications under charge second, relate 
to a letter written by the accused and addressed to the Rev. 
George Potts, August 10th, 1831. After the General Assem- 
bly, in May 1831, had restored me to my former station in 
your body, I felt anxious to effect, if possible, an amicable set- 
tlement of the difficulties between us. It seemed to me that 
such a settlement was required to save your own reputations ; 
to convince the religious community, both in Louisiana and in 
this State, that in your previous measures with respect to the 
accused you had been actuated by a spirit of sincerity, can- 
dour, and benevolence. I thought, further, that a pacific ad- 
justment of the controversy would greatly promote the peace 
and prosperity of the church in this region. Actuated by 
these motives, I resumed my correspondence with Mr. Potts 
in the summer of 1831. It is not true, as you have often in- 
sinuated during this trial,— -indeed, as some of you have posi- 
tively affirmed, — that I made overtures of peace to the Pres- 
bytery, to regain a good standing, and to avoid the trial which 
the Assembly had enjoined. After the decision of the General 
Assembly, I assured Mr. Potts that nothing could be more 
gratifying to me than a thorough inquiry into the grounds of 
the complaints and inuendoes which you had made against 
me, and that in every letter which I wrote to him during the 
summer preceding the meeting of the Presbytery at Port Gib- 
son. At Port Gibson I often expressed the same feelings, both 
in public and private. I was not solicitous to have a formal 
trial, because I thought a friendly investigation of the matter 
would occupy less time and be more satisfactory. I felt then, 
as I feel now, that there was nothing in my whole intercourse 
with the Presbytery but what would bear inspection. My 
conduct corresponded with my uniform declarations on this 
subject. During one year, after the decision of the General 
Assembly, I attended four different meetings of your body, 
which cost me a great deal of time, several hundred miles of 
travel, and money to the amount of hundreds of dollars. If 
I was anxious to avoid an investigation, why did I not keep 



73 



away from you 1 Do sane men usually spend a great deal of 
time, and toil, and money, in pursuing that which they dread, 
and the possession of which they believe will do them an in- 
jury ? I wonder that you had not more regard to your own 
character than to hazard the assertion that I was anxious to 
avoid this investigation. You know it to be false, moderator. 
You remember that, at Carmel church on Second Creek, I 
told you that nothing short of a complete investigation of this 
whole controversy, committed to paper and printed, would sa- 
tisfy me. Yet you have attempted to induce those who are 
unacquainted with this matter, to believe that I have had re- 
course to mean and disingenuous measures to avoid a trial, 
the result of which, I clearly foresaw, would be my entire dis- 
comfiture. Gentlemen, I am not yet discomfited ; but I very 
much fear that you have been doing that which will end in 
your disgrace, and in the discomfiture of the cause of Presby- 
terianism in these parts. 

During the years 1829 and 1830, Mr. Potts had often stated 
to the accused, in his correspondence, that he did not know 
how to reconcile the written exhibitions of my theological 
views, communicated to him and the Presbytery, with the re- 
presentations on the same subject made to them by certain 
professors of religion in New Orleans. I endeavoured to con- 
vince Mr. Potts, that the showings of these professors should 
be received by him with many qualifications, because they 
were known to be my strong personal enemies, and also be- 
cause that in my judgment their opposition to the accused 
could be traced to gross iniquity, not publicly known, and 
which, I hoped, would not be till the day of the final trial of 
all men. You will be pleased to notice my language, mode- 
rator. The opposition of Messrs. Rollins, Ross, Farrie, and 
Caldwell, and of Madams Hearsey and Hill, is to be ascribed 
to gross iniquity, I do not specify the kind of iniquity in 
which this opposition originated, nor do I specify the names of 
the perpetrators of it. These two points I left undetermined ; 
indeed, I had not fully made up my own mind with respect to 
the authors of this iniquity. My simple assertion is, that there 
had been in New Orleans gross iniquity, which had occasion- 



74 



ed a violent opposition to the accused. I do not charge thiif 
iniquity directly on any one. I do not say that Mr. Ross wag 
the author, the guilty agent, in this scene of depravity. I do 
not say of any of the persons named in my letter to George 
Potts, August 10th, 1831, that they themselves had committed 
gross iniquity ; but simply that their opposition to the accused 
had originated in, or was to be ascribed to, gross sins. Now, 
moderator, this is no more than what you have all said, and 
that repeatedly, in my presence. You have said, that no doubt 
the opposition to the accused in New Orleans originated in sin. 
Until within a year or two past, you all told me that the sin 
in question belonged to Dr. Rollins and others. Latterly you 
yave changed your ground ; now you say that the sin which 
occasioned the disturbance in the New Orleans church is to 
be ascribed to the accused. At any rate, we agree in having 
expressed the opinion, that a certain opposition originated in 
iniquity. If I may be lawfully denounced as a slanderer for 
having expressed such an opinion, then are you slanderers, for 
you have said the same thing. 

In my letter of August 10th, 1831, I mentioned the names 
of Rollins, Ross, Farrie, and others, chiefly for the reason that 
they were at that t\n\e the prominent leaders in an opposi- 
tion which had been in existence ever since the year 1823. 

I am sorry to be obliged to disclose the whole truth on this 
subject, but you and others have forced me to it ; I see no 
way in which I can avoid it. Self-defence is an imperative 
duty ; but in this case it cannot be performed without advert- 
ing to many occurrences of a really low and vulgar descrip- 
tion. In 1823, a Mr. Beebee from New- York was residing 
in New Orleans. He had, for some years before, made him- 
self conspicuous in this last-named place for his forwardness 
and apparent zeal in furthering the cause of religion ; and 
when I first visited New Orleans, he occupied a good standing 
in society. But in the latter part of 1823 and 1824, reports 
prejudicial to Mr. B's. character were very rife in New Or- 
leans. Several of those who had been his personal friends 
and admirers, called on the accused about this time to request 
him to visit Mr. Beebee, to inform him of the reports in cir~ 



75 



dilation against his character, and to obtain, if possible, the 
explanations necessary to his defence. At this time Mr. Bee- 
bee professed, and, as most thought, sincerely, to be my de- 
voted friend. This circumstance, and the consideration that 
Mr. Beebee would probably be more inclined to listen to a 
clerical than a lay friend, were, I suppose, the reasons why I 
was solicited to acquaint him with what we fondly hoped 
would turn out to be slanderous statements in relation to his 
conversation and deportment. Loud rumour affirmed that 
Mr. Beebee on several occasions had been guilty of the 
grossest obscenity in conversation, of uttering deliberate 
falsehoods, and of fraudulent transactions in business; pub- 
lic sentiment charged him with obscenity, falsehood, and fraud. 
I waited on Mr. Beebee agreeably to request ; stated to him, 
as I thought, in a delicate and respectful manner, the rumours 
afloat to his disadvantage ; and suggested the propriety of his 
adopting timely and efficient measures to convince, particu- 
larly his religious friends, that said rumours were unfounded. 
Instead of thanking me for the communication (made from 
the purest motives of friendship to Mr. Beebee and solicitude 
for the cause of religion), he applied to me the most abusive 
epithets for presuming to mention such gossip in his presence, 
and assured me that he should not stoop to notice the impo- 
tent efforts of his enemies in New Orleans. He remarked 
that he had a fair and well-established character in New- York, 
and that he was quite indifferent as to what the inhabitants of 
Louisiana thought or said about him. Concerning myself, he 
said that he had recently begun to suspect my sincerity, though 
he had mentioned these suspicions to no one ; that he should 
not be surprised to find that the rumours against him had been 
originated by myself ; that he did not think I was calculated 
to build up the cause of religion in New Orleans ; and he 
should in future do what he could to induce the church to send 
me away and procure another pastor. 

Now, Sir, you know that Mr. B. never cleared his charac- 
ter from the imputations above-named, in the opinion of the 
inhabitants of Louisiana. You know that he was the first per- 
son who commenced active measures against me ; and that, in 

12 



76 



conjunction with about half a dozen of kindred spirits, he 
persevered in a train of hostilities, till he became so univer- 
sally hated and despised, by t>oth the good and the bad, that 
he was obliged to leave this part of the country. You see 
then, Sir, that the opposition of this prime enemy originated in 
gross iniquity ; — either his personal iniquity, or the iniquity of 
those who had unjustly aspersed him. Several of you have 
often told me, that you thought the opposition of Mr. B. to 
the accused was wicked and unjustifiable. Why may not I 
express the same sentiment, and be guiltless ? 

In the winter of 1824, a General Whittlesey, a native of 
Connecticut, settled in New Orleans. He was by profession 
a lawyer ; I had known him in Louisville, Kentucky, where 
he was celebrated for a professed attachment to the Lord 
Jesus Christ, and a sincere, extraordinary devotedness to 
gambling ; where he was known to go from the church, the 
conference room, and the domestic altar to the gaming-house, 
to spend whole nights in the infamous occupation of the black 
leg and swindler ! When he came to New Orleans, several 
persons were living there who had known him in the West- 
ern States. By some of them, he was seen in the licensed gam- 
bling-houses of that city ; yet he was a regular attendant on 
my preaching-, and professedly my warm admirer. General 
Whittlesey had not been more than two or three months in 
New Orleans, before he applied to me for admission to the 
sacrament of the Lord's Supper. On that embarrassing oc- 
casion, I remarked to him that I should be pleased to encou- 
rage the disposition he manifested to make a public profession 
of religion in every way that I could conscientiously ; but a 
sense of duty to the cause of my master, constrained me to 
apprize him of the fact, that I was acquainted with his ad- 
dictness to gaming, both in Kentucky and Louisiana. I do 
not wish, said I, to wound your feelings ; but you must fur- 
nish me with satisfactory evidence that you have renounced 
this sin before I can admit you to the communion. He ap- 
peared much disappointed; confessed that for years he had 
been in the habit of gaming, that it was his besetting sin, 
and that he could not say that he had gained the mastery 



77 



mer it. Should I solemnly promise, said he. never more to 
gamble, so strong is my passion for this sin, that the promise 
would, in all probability, be violated. I then remarked, so 
long as you are in this state, it would not be expedient for you 
to approach the Lord's table ; strive to reform, persevere in 
your present course, and the time, I hope, will soon arrive, 
when all that opposes your introduction into the church 
will be overcome. 

After this interview, General Whittlesey absented himself 
entirely from my church, and united with Mr. Beebee in 
worshipping elsewhere, or in holding meetings in private 
houses. They visited the church members for the purpose 
of persuading them to leave me ; denounced my theology as 
spurious ; despatched numerous epistles to the Northern 
States, misrepresenting my situation and preaching, and as- 
persing my character. I believe that Dr. Rollins co-operated 
with them. They carried on their operations with great 
spirit, and apparently high hopes, till the approach of the 
warm season of 1824, when Mr. Beebee and General Whit- 
tlesey left the city. The latter gentleman crossed lake Pont- 
chartrunn, and sojourned till autumn in the parish of Wash- 
ington, bordering on the state of Mississippi. In the course 
of the summer, the General attended court at Franklin, the 
seat of justice for Washington parish. It is a notorious fact, 
that, during the session of the court at Franklin, General Whit- 
tlesey was seen at the gambling table ; that he was intoxicat- 
ed ; that he used profane language, and sung obscene baccha- 
nalian songs. The knowledge of the General's proceedings 
at Franklin being diffused among the inhabitants of New Or- 
leans, his influence in that city was at an end. In justice to 
the people of New Orleans, I should say that General Whit- 
tlesey never stood very high in the estimation of any there 
but a small number of illiterate professors of religion. Some 
time after this prostration, the General denied that he had 
ever applied to me for admission into the church ; perhaps 
his memory was treacherous. Though Mr. Beebee and the 
General sunk under the weight of their transgressions, yet the 
work which they commenced in New Orleans, has been going 



78 



on ever since. Successive labourers, though not numerous, 
have toiled in the same field, and exerted themselves to keep 
alive the misrepresentations and detraction which they had 
broached. Ordinarily, when a church member has become 
disaffected towards me, he or she has joined what I denomi- 
nate the Beebee and Whittlesey faction. This faction has al- 
ways been, up to this day, one and the same thing ; though not 
always composed of the same individuals. The spirit, de- 
sign, hopes, and measures of this faction, have been uniform. 
It has laboured constantly to blast the character and useful- 
ness of the accused, by originating and retailing false reports. 
Some have become united with it, who are probably sincere 
christians ; but weak, ignorant, prejudiced, and passionate. 
Such are probably most of those who names are mentioned 
in my letter to Mr. Potts, of August 10th, 1831. With these 
facts before you, can you say that it was slander to affirm 
that the Beebee and Whittlesey faction originated in gross 
sin ? But I have not yet done with this specification. Another 
gentleman was stirred up to vigorous exertions against the 
accused about this time. Mr. Moses Cox, a ruling elder in 
the First Presbyterian church, New Orleans, was an habitual 
attendant at the theatre ; several of the church members 
were dissatisfied with his conduct in this particular, and re- 
quested me to hold a private conversation with him on the 
subject. To avoid giving offence as much as possible, I visit- 
ed Mr. Cox as a delegate from the church, and informed him 
of the feelings of many members with respect to his frequent 
attendance at the theatre. He replied in substance, that the 
church had no right to proscribe any amusements as sinful 
which received the sanction and encouragement of respect- 
able people. My intelligent and moral neighbours, continued 
he, go to the theatre often, and I shall accompany them when- 
ever I please. I reminded him that none of his associates 
in these amusements were officers in the Presbyterian church. 
He answered, that, as an elder of the church, he felt it to be 
his duty to pursue a course that would not appear to those 
around him unnecessarily austere and forbidding ; and to en- 
deavour to recommend religion by a liberal and accommo- 



79 



dating deportment. The interview between Mr. Cox and 
the accused on this occasion was a lengthened one. Towards 
the close of it he became warm, and I thought angry. He 
said he had no doubt but that I had determined to depress, 
and, if possible, to ruin all those professing christians in New 
Orleans whom I regarded as superior to myself in talents 
and influence. On what other supposition, said he, can we 
account for the unjustifiable manner in which you have treat- 
ed Mr. Beebee and General Whittlesey ? At this juncture 
the Beebee faction was in its zenith ; Mr. Cox immediately 
joined it, and became a violent partizan. Prayer meetings 
were henceforward statedly held at his house, and several 
devotees thought that a revival of religion was about com- 
mencing in New Orleans. 

Shortly after this, an unmarried sister of the wife of Mr. 
Cox, who had lived a considerable time in the family, be- 
came a mother ; Mr. Cox, in a letter addressed to the ses- 
sion of the First Presbyterian church, New Orleans, a few 
weeks after the event just mentioned, confessed that he had 
been guilty of criminal conversation with his wife's sister. 
He was accordingly deposed from his office of ruling elder, 
and suspended from the church. Indeed, at the time of the 
interview just spoken of between Mr. Cox and the accused, 
the former was living in habitual adultery. Is it slander to 
say that I believe that the disaffection of Mr. Cox towards 
me originated in iniquity ? 

Mr. William Ross, another ruling elder in my church, set 
himself in array against me not long after the events which 
have just been narrated. Mr. Ross was, I am inclined to be- 
lieve, a man who feared God and loved his Saviour ; but he 
was in no ordinary degree bigoted, obstinate, and passionate. 
His enmity to me happened on this wise : — I was a boarder 
in his family when he admitted into it a poor lady from abroad, 
who appeared to be deserving of charity and very pious. 
She was a Methodist ; and the points of faith which distin- 
guish them from the Presbyterians were, from time to time, 
themes of conversation and dispute in the family. Mr. Ross 
became enamoured of this lady ; he told me one day about 



80 



this time that she was the most perfect human being that he 
had ever met with. Not many weeks passed away after the 
introduction of this lady into Mr. Ross's domestic circle, before 
I was told, by gentlemen of the first respectability, that she 
did not possess a good character in the parts whence she 
came. Prior to the reception of this intelligence, I had no- 
ticed some things in her deportment which awakened suspi- 
cions as to her soundness. All things considered, I became 
convinced that Mr. Ross was deceived and imposed on by 
this woman, and that it was my duty to acquaint him with my 
feelings on the subject. This unpleasant duty I performed 
with as much skill and delicacy as I could call into exercise. 
The attempt was unkindly received by Mr. Ross. He told 
me that nothing could convince him that this lady was not an 
angel ; her superiority in intelligence, taste, and piety, was 
clear as the sun. He intimated that my doubts as to the lady 
could be traced to sectarian prejudices. She was not a Pres- 
byterian, therefore I disliked her, and had insulted her in con- 
versation on the peculiarities of the Methodist system at his 
table a few days before. He added, if you do not like the 
society of this lady, you had better leave my house at once, 
and procure lodgings elsewhere. Mr. Ross's advice was 
complied with. He immediately commenced worshipping 
God in the Methodist church in company with the lady whom 
he so highly adored, and joined the Beebee faction. His hos- 
tility to me was unabated till the day of his death, with one 
exception. In the summer of 1828, Mr. Ross was so much 
injured by a fall, that his life was despaired of. In full pos- 
session of his reason, he made preparations for his departure. 
He sent for me to visit him. On my arrival he requested all 
to leave the room except his wife. When the doors were 
closed, he took me by the hand in an affectionate manner, and 
spoke nearly as follows : " Mr. Clapp, I am sorry that I left 
" your church, 1 believe you to be a good man, 1 have always 
" regarded you as such ; 1 am going into eternity, I wish to die 
u in peace with all mankind. Forgive me for my violent oppo- 
" sition to you ; I thought you did not treat that lady in a chris- 
£i tian manner who was in my family when you quit my house, 



ei 



ts but now I think you was actuated by good motives." Contra* 
ry to the expectation of every one, Mr. Ross recovered from 
the effects of the fall. With returning health and strength 
his hostility to the accused revived ; after recovery, his oppo- 
sition was more violent and bitter than ever. The lady sub- 
sequently led an intemperate and immoral life ; and the very 
worthy sons of Mr. Ross were much annoyed and mortified 
by her misconduct. Mr. Ross, as I believe, had a good deal 
of influence over Mrs. Hill and Mrs. Hearsey. By his agency, 
in part, were they induced to embark in hostilities against the 
accused. 

Mr. Hugh Farrie is another gentleman whose name is men- 
tioned in my letter to George Potts of August 10th, 1831. I 
have always been of the opinion that Mr. Farrie is an upright 
man, though he gives himself up to the power of strong pas- 
sions and prejudices. He and his family were regular attend- 
ants at my church till a short time after the following occur- 
rence took place : I was called from my bed one night, at 
about 12 o'clock, to visit Mrs. Farrie. The servant who came 
for me appeared to be in great haste, and urged me to use all 
possible dispatch. In the hurry of dressing and walking to the 
house, I did not once inquire what was the exigency that de- 
manded my presence at the dead hour of night ; but supposed 
that some one in the family was very sick, and perhaps in the 
agonies of death. On entering the house I beheld a spectacle 
which I shall not attempt to describe. The " dramatis per- 
sonal were Mr. Farrie, his wife, and a servant girl. Mrs. 
Farrie accused her husband of a crim. con. with the female 
slave. The slave declared that her master was guilty. Mrs. 
Farrie wanted my counsel on the occasion, but I was so 
shocked that I was obliged to withdraw. Next morning the 
lady sent for me. I went to her chamber ; she begged that 
I would forget and forgive her foolish conduct the preceding 
night ; said that she was under the influence of jealousy ; that 
by punishments and threats she had made the servant swear 
to what was false, and that her husband was one of the best 
men in the world. From that time I hav® treated Mr. Farrie 
upon the supposition that his wife told the truth when she 



82 



affirmed that her husband was the best man living. But how 
has Mr. Farrie treated the accused ? He has denounced me 
as an heretic ; misrepresented my sentiments ; declared me 
to be destitute of principle, by saying that I would subscribe 
to any creed, even that of Mahomet, to accomplish my ends ; 
and sent me insulting letters, in which he has called me a liar 
and a slanderer. In one of these letters, he says that I re- 
marked to one of this judicatory, some time ago, that I knew 
Farrie to be a bad man. Now, Sir, I never made a remark 
of this nature to any member of the Mississippi Presbytery ; 
whoever has told Mr. Farrie so, has uttered what is false. 

With these facts before you, can you say upon your oath, 
moderator, that I am a slanderer, because I have said that the 
opposition of Mr. Farrie was to be ascribed to gross sin ? I 
did not say it was his personal sin ; on that point I gave no 
opinion in my letter to Mr. Potts. In justice to myself I 
must remark, that I was not the first to disclose the occurrence 
that took place at Mr. Farrie's house ; it was communicated 
by Mrs. Farrie herself to several of her neighbours, and, 
though not generally known, was much talked about in a par- 
ticular circle shortly after it happened. 

I would now direct your attention to the case of Dr. Rol- 
lins. You say I am a slanderer, because I have said that I 
believe that his opposition to me sprung from gross iniquity. 
Now, moderator, how inconsistent is it in you to bring against 
me this specification. Some time ago Doctor Rollins was 
suspended by the session of the First Presbyterian church in 
New Orleans for gross sin ; he appealed from the decision 
of session to this Presbytery ; you affirmed the decision of 
session, and your recorded opinion is that Dr. Rollins had 
been guilty of gross iniquity ; yet you call me a slanderer 
because I affirm that in my judgment the conduct of Dr. Rol- 
lins towards me is to be ascribed to gross sin ! I do not say 
as much as you do against him. You affirm that he has been 
guilty of gross iniquity ; I simply aver that his conduct to me 
originated in iniquity, not specifying the perpetrator of the ini- 
quity. Yet you are innocent, and I am a slanderer. Mar- 
vellous ! The senior member of the prosecuting Committee 



83 



once told me that he had known Doctor Rollins for more than 
20 years, and that he, Doctor Rollins, had been a very wicked 
man, and an immoral man, since he first joined the church. 
Mr* Potts> in a letter to the accused, says, alluding to Rollins 
and others, that " they are the enemies of all righteousness." 
This is pretty severe, moderator ; but you may say what you 
please of the Doctor and be spotless. Gentlemen, how will 
such conduct appear in the estimation of an impartial public? 
I fear that you are on a precipice from which you will soon 
fall into a pit of ruin. Sir, Doctor Rollins is known in New 
Orleans. I have never injured that man ; but he has made 
for years the most indefatigable efforts to injure and destroy 
the accused. Is not this iniquity ? 

With respect to Mr. William Caldwell, his sin consists 
chiefly in permitting some personal differences between him 
and the accused to alienate his affections from me, and to en- 
gage him in a train of hostilities which he will look back upon 
with shame from heaven, if shame can be felt there. Mr* 
Potts remarked to me the other day, that Mr. Caldwell had 
admitted in his presence that he did not believe Mr. Clapp 
was a man of veracity. An intelligent professor of religion 
from the Northern States informed me that he heard Mr. 
Caldwell say that I was doing all I could in New Orleans to 
destroy the cause of religion. So Mr. Caldwell has frequent- 
ly called me a liar ; he has frequently said that I am labouring 
with all my might to prevent the growth of pure and undefiled 
religion in New Orleans. Now r , Mr. Caldwell cannot adduce 
one fact or argument to show that I am a liar and an enemy 
to Christianity. The assertions are gratuitous, and unsupport- 
ed by a particle of evidence. But to make such assertions 
without proof is gross sin. In a great many instances has 
Mr. Caldwell sinnned against me in a similar way. 

Madams Hill and Hearsey sinned also with their tongues 
grossly. I never charged those ladies with any specific im- 
moralities. They misrepresented my doctrines in a most 
outrageous style, and that after I had called on them and set 
them right as to my views. I have imputed their miscon- 
duct chiefly to their ignorance, and to the malign influence 



84 



exercised over them by Messrs. Ross, Farrie, and Caldweft 
When I said that I had traced several false reports to thes© 
ladies, I did not intend to intimate that they originated and re- 
tailed what they knew and believed at the time to be false 
reports; I did not say that they were deliberate liars. 1 
merely said, what 1 now say, that they busied themselves in 
circulating false reports concerning me. Now, moderator, 
could any intelligent, candid person credit the representations 
of these individuals concerning the accused with all the facts 
and circumstances now narrated before them ? Could they 
do it, even on the supposition that they believed them to be 
in the main sincere and honest ? A christian may have his 
mind so prejudiced and warped, that his testimony, as to a 
given point, could not be credited even though we believed 
that he intended to tell the truth. 

Much has been said during this trial about the injunction 
of secrecy in my letter to George Potts, August 10th, 183L 
On this subject you do me great injustice. I did not wish to 
have that part of the letter read to the Presbytery in case of 
my absence, simply because to the younger members it would 
have been unintelligible. The older members had heard 
something of my difficulties, and knew that the statements to 
my disadvantage came from personal enemies. As soon as 
Mr. Potts got my letter of August 10th, 1831, he answered it ; 
in this answer he says, that " he considered the allusion to 
M Caldwell and others as amounting to slander, and that he 
" should therefore communicate the whole letter to the Pres- 
" bytery," This answer came to my hands when I was on 
my way to Natchez in September 1831. A day or two after 
I had received it, I saw Mr* Potts at his own house, and told 
him that I had no objection to his publishing the letter if he 
thought that was the most expedient course. I told him that 
there was nothing in that letter that I regretted having writ- 
ten ; that it was one of the most deliberate acts of my life,, 
and composed from a calm sense of duty to my God, my fa- 
mily, and my own character. I told him what 1 meant by the 
language, that the opposition of these individuals was to be 
ascribed to gross iniquity. After listening to the recital* he 



85 



said, that if all my narration was true, (and he knew a part of 
it to be true,) I was justifiable in using the language, now de- 
nominated slanderous, in my letter of August 10th, 1831. I 
left Mr. Potts' house for Port Gibson. After my absence, if I 
am not mistaken, Mr. Potts wrote down to New Orleans, to 
inform Mrs. Hearsey and others that I had grossly slandered 
them ; that I had charged them with specific immoralities. 
He tells me that I had done that only which was justifiable ; 
he tells my enemies in New Orleans that I had been guilty 
of abominable slander. This, Sir, is very consistent. 

When these facts shall be spread before the public, what 
opinion will they form of your heads and your hearts ? You 
accuse me of aggravated and malicious slander, because,/ro»» 
<t sense of duty, I disclosed to you the true cause of the oppo- 
sition made to me in New Orleans. In this disclosure I do 
not say of any persons in New Orleans that they are disho- 
nest, or that they are not christians ; I did not say in my let- 
ter of August 10th, 1831, that any professors of religion in 
New Orleans had been guilty of gross iniquity ; but that an op- 
position to me had originated in gross iniquity. Sir, no in- 
genuity can make it out that that language, fairly construed, 
is defamatory. It contains no charge against an individual. 
The recital of vulgar anecdotes, proving that the opposition 
to me in New Orleans originated in gross iniquity, I could 
have made much longer, but presuming that what has already 
been offered is enough for my defence, I shall reserve the re- 
mainder for some future occasion. 

Under the 3d specification, 

I am charged with having denied the slanderous statements 
made in relation to Mr. Farrie and others in my letter of Au- 
gust 10th, 183L 

Sir, there is not a particle of evidence in support of this 
specification. My letter to Mr. Farrie after my return from 
Port Gibson, is in perfect harmony with my letter to George 
Potts, August 10th, 1831 ; yet you say that the one letter 
affirms what the other denies. Sir, the allegation is entirely 
baseless. Look at these letters ; compare them. In my let- 
ter to Mr. Farrie, I deny that in my letter to George Potts I 



86 



had given the names of six individuals whose characters were 
such that their testimony ought not to be received against me ; 
but in the last-named letter, I say to Mr. Potts concerning six 
individuals, that if he knew as much as I did, he would not 
credit what they said (meaning, as the connexion shows,) about 
my preaching and character. I say the same now. I do not 
say that he would not credit their assertions because their 
characters were not good, because they were not persons of 
veracity ; this is an inference of your own. The simple fact, 
that they were my enemies, that they belonged to an opposite 
party, was a sufficient reason for not crediting what they said 
about me. 1 say, in my letter to Mr. Farrie, that I had not 
brought a charge against the character of a single professor of 
religion then in New Orleans, (in my letter of August 10th, 
1831.) This is true ; for proof thereof, I appeal to the letters 
themselves. Sir, you can point out no contradiction in them. 

The very day after my return to New Orleans from Port 
Gibson, in 1831, 1 visited Mrs. Hearsey. She informed me 
that Mr. Potts had written to town, stating that I had charged 
her and others with specific immoralities. I told her that Mr. 
Potts had misconstrued my letter. I then repeated to her the 
very words of my letter, and explained what I meant by the 
phraseology, that the opposition to which she belonged was to 
be ascribed to gross iniquity. After receiving my explana- 
tions, she said she only blamed me for making use of her name 
in connexion with that opposition at all ; and that she knew 
well that the opposition had sprung from sin. I replied, that 
I considered her as identified with the opposition, in conse- 
quence of her vigorous efforts the past winter to convince 
the members of my church that my preaching was unsound 
and dangerous. She then said it was her wish to be on friend- 
ly terms with me in future ; so we parted. From her house 
I proceeded to Mr. Goodale's, who married Mrs. HilPs daugh- 
ter. To him I made precisely the same statement that I did 
to Mrs. Hearsey ; but he has forgotten it. Poor man, what a 
bad memory he has ! No one was present during my con- 
versation with Mr. Goodale. While conversing with Mrs. 
Hearsey, her son-in-law, Mr. Robbins, came into the room 



87 



once or twice, and listened for a few moments to the talk and 
then retired. He could not have heard enough of it to be 
able to describe it correctly. The language which he puts 
into my mouth on that occasion I never uttered ; I mean the 
oath which he makes me take when denying that I had charg- 
ed Mrs. Hearsey with specific immoralities. One word on 
the testimony of Mr. Franklin, the tract agent : it is a com- 
pound of truth, falsehood, and caricature, in which the two 
last ingredients greatly preponderate. 

After my return from Port Gibson, I immediately wrote to 
Mr. Potts, requesting him to send copies of the famous epis- 
tle to all the persons in New Orleans whose names had been 
mentioned in it. This, Sir, appears in evidence, and should 
satisfy you that I had not intentionally given to these persons 
a false account of the letter ; for I refer them to the letter 
itself to substantiate my verbal statements. I have never de- 
nied any statements which were made in my letter to Mr. 
Potts of August 10th, 1831 ; but I have denied, and do now 
deny, the accuracy of Mr. Potts' account of that letter. He 
affirms that I attempted in that letter to attack and ruin the 
characters of innocent persons, and in a way that excited his 
surprise and indignation. You know, moderator, that the in- 
dividuals mentioned in that letter have been for a long time 
my personal enemies ; you know, that for a long time they 
have been in the habit of contradicting the statements which 
I have made to the Presbytery concerning my preaching and 
doctrines ; you know, that for a long time prior to my letter 
of August 10th, 1831, they had privately and publicly de- 
nounced me as a liar and heretic. They were the aggressors ; 
they attacked we,uand deliberately attempted to ruin me. In 
repelling their assault, I felt obliged to say that their conduct 
towards me was to be ascribed to gross iniquity ; / say it now. 
You, Sir, have often said the same thing. Mr. Potts, in a let- 
ter to me, which I have preserved, alluding to a part of the 
persons mentioned in my epistle, August 10th, 1831, stigma- 
tizes them by declaring that they are " evil men and seducers, 
" full of all subtlety and mischief, and enemies of all righteous- 
" ness " He is pardonable ; he did nothing wrong in applying 



83 



to them such opprobrious epithets ; but he read my letter 
" with surprise and indignation/' because I remarked of the 
very persons whom he had previously styled " evil seducers, 
"full of mischief, enemies of all righteousness" that their con- 
duct to me was to be ascribed to gross sin. Sir, the specifi- 
cations relating to my letter of August 10th, 1831, are ridi- 
culously absurd. 

The 4th specification under the 2d charge, alleges that I 
uttered falsehood in stating, after my return to New Orleans 
from the Presbytery in Port Gibson, in October, 1831, that 
the differences between me and the Mississippi Presbytery 
were entirely settled. Now, Sir, the real language which I 
used when spea-king on this subject was, " that the differences 
" between me and the Presbytery had been amicably settled" 
That I uttered the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 
truth, is evident from your own records ; to them I appeal. 
According to your own showing, it was settled, during the 
session of the Presbytery at Port Gibson, that I should be re- 
ceived as a member of your body ; it was also settled that 
there was nothing in my theology which rendered it improper 
for me to continue to be a minister in the Presbyterian church. 
Now, Sir, these were the only points of controversy between 
us ; they were both settled at Port Gibson, and amicably set- 
tled too. Such was my affirmation, entirely in accordance 
with your own records ; yet you discern falsehood in my 
affirmation. You must possess remarkably sharp optics, mo- 
derator ; you can see what is not in existence. But I will 
not waste the time in exposing this groundless specification. 

You charge me with falsehood in reporting that it was with 
explanations that I signed the questions, a copy of which is 
contained in printed minutes, pages 60 and 61. Now, Sir, I 
have uniformly affirmed, and do now affirm, that it was with 
explanations that I subscribed to those questions. You know, 
Sir, that my affirmation is true ; every member of this body 
knows that it is true. Sorry I am that you have been so weak 
as to bring this accusation against me. I am no prophet, but 
I predict, that when the matters of fact appertaining to this 
specification shall be known to the public, there will be from 



89 



quarters strong expressions of astonishment and indigftS" 
tion. And, moderator, they will be known, ingenious and un^ 
principled as may be your attempts to conceal them. 

Hearken to a recital of the facts belonging to this subject* 
On the second day of the session of the Presbytery at Port 
Gibson, in October 1831, Mr. Potts suggested to the accused 
the propriety of my communicating to the Presbytery the 
same views of Calvinism which were contained in my letter 
to him of August 10th, 1831. He said he did not know what 
the Presbytery might think of those views, but that at any 
rate such a communication would bring my case fairly before 
them. Mr. Potts' recommendation was followed. I address- 
ed a letter to the moderator of your body, October 14, 1831, 
explanatory of my letter to the Mississippi Presbytery dated 
March 5th, 1830. This letter was read for the first time 
when I was present. After some discussion, it was placed in 
the hands of a Committee, who were instructed to confer 
with the accused on the nature of its contents. Mr. Donan 
was chairman of this Committee. The Committee held their 
first meeting with the accused on the same day that they 
were appointed. During this meeting I gave them my views 
on the Trinity. I recollect distinctly of stating to them my 
disbelief of a plurality of agents in the Godhead ; but my wil- 
lingness to use the word persons, if it were employed simply 
to designate the fact, that in the Scriptures both the Son and 
the Holy Spirit are sometimes represented as divine, and as 
acting separately from God the Father. On the same occa- 
sion I explained to the Committee my views on election ; I 
told them that I believed in a certain kind of election, which 
I supposed would not be regarded by them as orthodox, and 
which might be thus expressed : — God, foreseeing from all 
eternity precisely what number could be induced to repent 
and believe the Gospel, determined from all eternity to save 
that definite number ; and at the same time we must admit 
that this gracious determination to save was not based upon 
the foresight of their good works or human merit, for no one 
could merit salvation ; but upon the unbounded and unde- 
served benignity of our Heavenly Father, agreeably to the 



90 

teaching of Jesus H God so loved the world as to give hii 
" only begotten son, that whosoever believes on him may not pe~ 
" risk, but obtain eternal life" I subjoined, " this view of elec<* 
" tion is in my opinion Arminian." To my utter astonishment 
the Committee remarked that they could see nothing in it es- 
sentially objectionable. In the same explicit manner I ex- 
plained to them my views on the other topics embraced in 
the printed interrogatories. At the conclusion of this meet- 
ing, the chairman of the Committee of conference observed 
that they were perfectly satisfied that I was as sound as any 
of the New School men ; that they should communicate my 
views and explanations to the brethren, and recommend the 
abandonment of the plan of prosecution urged by Mr. Potts 
and others. So ended the first day this subject was agitated. 

The next morning, during the session of the Presbytery, 
Mr. Donan whispered to me, and said that the Committee 
would like to have another interview with me. Accordingly 
I retired with them to a remote part of the Methodist church 
in which the Presbytery was holding its sessions. By this 
time I began to suspect the candour and ingenuousness of 
some of the brethren ; I was not altogether as simple and 
credulous as you imagined, moderator. On inquiring of the 
Committee what they wanted further, the chairman remark- 
ed, that the Committee had communicated my views and ex- 
planations to the Presbytery, and that a majority declared 
their satisfaction with my theology ; but that one or two de- 
sired to have the sentiments contained in my letter of Octo- 
ber 14th, 1831, presented in the shape of interrogatories. 
Mr. Donan added, " this is unnecessary ; but I am willing to 
" do any thing that is not foolish or wicked to bring this matter 
" to a settlement without delay." I told the Committee to make 
out the questions, and I would subscribe to them if I could 
do it conscientiously. After the expiration of about an hour, 
the Committee brought to me what has been called during 
this trial " the First Set of Interrogatories ; v I subscribed to 
them, with the written explanations which that document ex- 
hibits. I made other verbal explanations, so as to render it, 
as I thought, impossible for the Committee to misapprehend 



91 



my true sentiments. After the signature I accompanied the 
Committee to the Presbytery. 

In a few moments Mr. Donan arose, holding the first set 
of interrogatories in his hand, and, addressing the moderator, 
said that the Committee of conference was ready to report. 
It was agreed to hear his report. He commenced reading it. 
I particularly recollect his reading, in a distinct, audible man- 
ner, the interrogatories to which I had subscribed, and the 
written explanations appended. After reading this document, 
he proceeded to relate to the Presbytery the verbal explana- 
tions which I had made to the Committee. Whilst thus en- 
gaged, some one, I do not remember who it was, interrupted 
him, by saying that they did not wish to hear any talk from 
the Committee. A discussion ensued, in which I took no 
part, for I was by that time convinced that some of the bre- 
thren were acting dishonourably and disingenuously. Silence 
was produced by order of the moderator. Mr. Donan sat 
down ; I saw him hand the interrogatories and my explana- 
tions to some of the brethren. 

There was considerable whispering, after which Mr. Donan 
came to me, and said that the Committee would like to have 
another interview with me. I accordingly retired with them 
to another part of the church, and commenced the interview 
by asking the question, " what is wanted now ?" Mr. Donan 
answered by saying, that two of the brethren could not un- 
derstand my explanations to the interrogatories. This asto- 
nished me very much ; a child could understand them, mode- 
rator. Mr. Donan then asked me if I had any objection to 
subscribe the interrogatories on a paper by themselves, with- 
out the explanations. This, said he, will satisfy every one. 
I replied that I had no objection, as my explanations were 
already before the Presbytery. He said, certainly ; the Pres- 
bytery has heard them read, and seen them ; and all but two 
members are satisfied with them. I then left the Committee 
and went into the Presbytery ; in a few minutes *Mr. Donan 
brought to me the second set of questions, which appear in 
your printed minutes ; I subscribed them without saying a 
word, because I supposed it would be considered by all that 

14 



92 



my former explanations would be sufficient. It did not occur 
to me that any of you could take the position that no explana- 
tions were made because they were not repeated at the time 
of the last signature. To take this position is a subterfuge 
too mean for any white person to adopt ; especially since the 
Chairman of the Committee positively assured me that my 
explanations would be considered as before the Presbytery, 
though not on the "same paper with the interrogatories that 
have been printed. Some of you pretend to say that I made 
no explanations to the Presbytery, because the first report 
presented by the Chairman of the Committee of Conference 
was not adopted. The second report, Sir, embracing the 
printed questions, was not adopted ; but was it not before 
the Presbytery ? In the same manner precisely were the first 
report, and the accompanying explanations, before the Pres- 
bytery. Sir, the fact is, I did give you explanations as to the 
sense in which I subscribed to the interrogatories on pages 60 
and 61 of your printed minutes. I gave them in every possi- 
ble form ; in private conversation, in verbal communications 
to the Committee, and in written documents read to the whole 
Presbytery in session by a Committee of your own appoint- 
ment. Sir, the disgrace which you have attempted to fix on 
me by this specification, will deservedly and irresistibly recoil 
upon yourselves. Some of you sent a copy of the second in- 
terrogatories to New Orleans immediately after the meeting 
at Port Gibson, accompanied with the assertion that I made 
no explanations concerning them. How false ! The inhabit- 
ants of New Orleans now understand this subject ; and what 
do they think about it, moderator ? They think that it is prov- 
ed, not that / am false, but that you are deliberate liars and 
slanderers. 

The final specification under the second charge is, that I 
have been guilty of falsehood, in declaring the pastoral letter 
sent by the Presbytery to the first Presbyterian church in 
New Orleans to be false in detail and in toto. 

Now, suppose that I actually made the assertion charged 
upon me ; and suppose,/wr//ier, that the' statement is incorrect ; 
with what propriety, even then, could you denominate it false- 



93 



hood ? I declare that a certain document, purporting to be 
an exhibition of facts, is full of errors. I make the declaration 
sincerely, but it is incorrect ; the document does not contain 
the errors which I have imputed to it ; am I therefore a liar ? 
Suppose that I should affirm that the Bible was fraught with 
erroneous statements ; would this convict me of falsehood ? 
But you make a composition, sent out and circulated by this 
Presbytery, more sacred than the Bible itself. Admirable ! 
A man must be a liar who says that the Mississippi Presbytery 
can err, or that they have erred. Moderator, if every speci- 
fication under the second charge were true, it would not fol- 
low that I have been guilty of falsehood. All that you could 
make out against me, even in that case, would be that I had 
been mistaken as to certain facts relating to my intercourse 
with the Presbytery. But, Sir, I repeat the declaration that 
the pastoral letter abounds with erroneous statements ; I ne- 
ver said it was false in detail and in toto. I will direct your 
attention to some of the misstatements in the pastoral letter. 
It is not true as you aver, (page 1 1 of printed minutes) " that 
" I was interrogated strictly in relation to my adoption of the 
u Confession of Faith and Book of Discipline of the Presbyte- 
" rian church at your spring meeting in 1824." It is not true, 
as you state on page 12th of printed minutes, " that in the 
" winter of 1826, a Committee of the Presbytery expressed 
ff dissatisfaction with the sentiments of a sermon submitted to 
4t their inspection by the accused." Nearly the whole of page 
I5th of printed minutes is false, and I have the means of de- 
monstrating its falsehood ; but it is useless to occupy the time 
of the Presbytery in examining that letter. I have done this 
on former occasions in my correspondence with Mr. Potts ; 
you all possess my views on the subject. The pastoral letter 
professes to give a history of my connexion with your body. 
In this history there are some incorrect statements ; so I be- 
lieve, — so I affirm. You take the ground that such an affirma- 
tion amounts to falsehood. Gentlemen, the position is too 
ridiculous to merit a serious examination. Suppose you were 
to write a history of the State of Mississippi ; if your position 
be correct I could not review that history, and point out what 



94 



I might believe to be its inaccuracies without being guilty of 
falsehood. Marvellous ! 

I have now performed, moderator, a painful duty. The 
charges which you have preferred against me are in many re- 
spects frivolous, in all utterly groundless. When I first read 
them, I could not persuade myself that you were in earnest. 
Subsequent disclosures have convinced me, that three years 
ago you formed a plot for expelling me from the Presbyterian 
church. At that time you circulated a multitude of false re- 
ports concerning me ; you have since, of course, felt the high- 
est interest in persuading the religious community that you 
believed those reports to be true. All your satellites in New 
Orleans have been industriously employed to aid you in this 
work of persecution. After all, what have you achieved? 
" Monies parturiunt, ridiculus mus nascitur." Yet you are at- 
tempting to persuade yourselves that the charges against me 
are substantiated. You will not give to the arguments adduc- 
ed in my defence the weight to which they are fairly entitled. 
You have prejudged my case ; truth has no more effect upon 
your minds "than feathers falling upon marble." Bishop 
Watson somewhere says, " you might as well attempt to cram 
" a cannon ball down the muzzle of a musket, as to move a 
" bigoted, prejudiced, narrow-minded person to decide against 
" his passions, by the force of truth and just reasoning." The 
junior member of the prosecuting Committee told you yester- 
day, that it was your duty not to exercise towards me fear, 
pity, or love. Barbarous sentiment ! The brother pretended 
to quote from an heathen author ; he furnished to my mind 
conclusive evidence that he possesses an heathenish heart. 
" Brethren, (says an apostle,) if a man be overtaken in a fault, 
" ye who are spiritual restore such a one in the spirit of meek- 
" ness ; considering thyself lest thou also be tempted. Bear ye 
44 one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ. For 
"if a man think himself to be something when he is nothing, he 
" deceiveth himself." 

I hope, moderator, you do not fear me ; I ask not for your 
pity ; I do not expect to have your love. Throughout this 
trial you have manifested a deplorable destitution of charity, 



95 



and a degree of addling, pompous pride, which can be felt by 
little minds only when invested with power and the love of 
domineering. My prayer is, that God will be pleased to grant 
you repentance and better hearts. 

My case is now fairly before you. I do not say, that if my 
rights are not maintained here, they will be prostrated forever ; 
but I do say, that you should proceed to make up a decision 
with the same caution, solemnity, and fear of doing me injus- 
tice, which you should cherish were you now to pass an act, 
the result of which would inevitably seal my character and 
destiny for time. I am perfectly willing to leave the Presby- 
terian church ; I expect to leave it ; and I intend, with the 
blessing of Heaven, to carry with me when I go, that most 
invaluable of all terrestrial possessions, — an msullkd reputa* 
/ton. 



P1SGAH CHURCH, PIKE COUNTY. 



Thursday, 3 o'clock P. M. October 12th, 1826. 

The business of the Presbytery was resumed. 

The moderator called the Rev. Wm. Montgomery to the 
chair, and retired. A communication addressed to the mo- 
derator of the Mississippi Presbytery was received, and, after 
some deliberation on the communication, it was resolved that 
Messrs. Patterson, Vancourt, and Hunter, be a Committee to 
examine the documents and report to the Presbytery. 

Friday, 9 o'clock, A. M. 
The Committee unto whom was referred the communica- 
tion which was received yesterday, was called upon ; but 
they requesting farther time to report, the request was 
granted. 

The Presbytery had a recess until after divine service. 
The business of the Presbytery was resumed, and the above 
Committee presented the following report : 

They had examined the papers committed to them, and 
have found them to be from Mr. John Rollins of New Or- 
leans, and to have for their object the preferring of charges 
to this Presbytery against the Rev. Theodore Clapp, as fol- 
lows : — 

1st. The teaching of false doctrines, and doctrines in direct 
opposition to the Confession of Faith ; a sermon preached on 
the 6th day of November last, and another preached on the 
28th of March, 1824, are especially referred to. This charge 
is professed to be supported by extracts from notes taken by 
hearers of said sermons, and by reference to individuals who 
either held conversation with Mr. Clapp or heard conversa- 
tions between him and others. 

2d. For neglect of duty in not catechising children, pro- 
moting prayer meetings, &c. 

3d. The unexemplary manner in which he allowed several 



98 



balls, composed of slaves and free people of colour, to be held 
in the college over which he presided. This charge is pro- 
fessed to be supported by a certified extract from the records 
of the mayor's office of New Orleans, by which it appears 
that Mr. Clapp was fined in the sum of twenty dollars for 
said offence. 

All of these charges Mr. Rollins professes to have full proof 
to establish. The following persons are referred to as wit- 
nesses, viz. Mr. Beebee, Gen. Whittlesey, William Ross, 
James Robbinson, Robert M'Nair, Raehel Pyle, Alfred Hen- 
nen of this city, Rev. Mr. Hudson of Kentucky, Mr. Jacob 
Badger, Joshua Baldwin, Dr. R. M. Pearse, Dr. Perlee, and 
a young man by the name of Gray, now in New York, the 
Rev. Mr. Randalson of the Baptist* church, and many others, 
if required. 

The Committee would farther report, that it appears from 
said documents that Mr. Rollins was under process before the 
session of the church of which Mr. Clapp is pastor, at the 
time of his preferring the above charges. 

On motion, resolved, that the report be accepted and the 
Committee discharged. 

Saturday, October Uth 9 9 o'clock. 
The following preamble and resolutions were read and 
adopted : 

The Presbytery deem it their indispensable duty to pay 
strict attention to all its members, and to guard rigidly against 
errors, either in principle or practice. Yet, as the Book of 
Discipline particularly enjoins that " scandalous charges are 
u not to be received by any judicatory of the Presbyterian 
<c church on slight grounds ; that great caution ought to be 
e< exercised in receiving accusations from any person who is 
41 himself under censure or process, or who is deeply inte- 
4t rested in any respect in the conviction of the accused ;" 
and as the charges preferred against the Rev. Theodore 
Clapp came from a person, who appears from his own docu- 
ments to be under actual process for neglect of duty, and is 
but little known to the members of the Presbytery : There- 



99 



fore resolved, that before the charge or charges be formally 
brought before the Presbytery, a Committee be appointed, 
whose duty it shall be to investigate this business more par- 
ticularly, and report the result of their investigation to the 
next meeting of the Presbytery. 

And further resolved, that the Rev. James Smylie, Rev. 
George Potts, and Rev. John H. Vancourt, be said Com- 
mittee. 

Peniel, January 31, 1827. 
The Committee appointed by the Presbytery to investigate 
the foundation of the charges preferred by John Rollins 
against the Rev. Theodore Clapp were called upon to report, 
and they submitted the following, viz. 

New Orleans, December 18th, 1826. 
The Committee of the Mississippi Presbytery appointed to 
inquire into the foundation of certain charges preferred by 
John Rollins against the Rev. Theodore Clapp, beg leave to 
report, that the Committee met on the 15th, 16th, and 18th 
instant. John Rollins was called, who laid before the Com- 
mittee the following charges and specifications, viz. 

CHARGES AND SPECIFICATIONS EXHIBITED AGAINST THE REV. 
THEODORE CLAPP, MEMBER OF THE MISSISSIPPI PRESBYTERY, 
AND PASTOR OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF NEW ORLEANS. 

CHARGE I. 

Preaching false doctrine at different times, in direct oppo- 
sition to the doctrine of the Presbyterian church, as contain- 
ed in the Presbyterian Confession of Faith. 

SPECIFICATION L 

Doctrines advanced in the Presbyterian church in this city 
on the 28th of March, 1824, in a sermon preached from the 
18th chapter, 2, 3, and 4 verses of Ezekiel, as stated in tran- 
script No, L viz. 

God does not visit the iniquities of the fathers upon the 
children ; it is inconsistent with moral rectitude, and only done 

15 



100 



by savages and barbarians. The doctrine of Foreordination 
is shocking to common sense, and inconsistent with the mer 
cy and justice of God ; for God to determine whatsoever 
comes to pass, would be to determine all crime that has ever 
been committed, and to determine that men shall do that for 
which he intends to punish them. This would make him, in- 
stead of the best, the worst of beings ; more hard-hearted, un- 
feeling, and unjust than man, who, with all his depravity, 
could not be capable of such an action. 

The sum of all the arguments in favour of the Calvinist 
doctrine that I have ever heard is this : — That God foreknows 
all things ; of course he must be capable of doing what is 
for the best. Now this is an error in the outstart ; a false 
premises, from which false conclusions must follow. The fact 
is, God /oreknows nothing ; to him all things are present ; 
there is no past, no future ; no succession of action or thought. 
If the doctrine of Calvinism be true, it would be wrong for 
God to require his creatures to repent, for they would be do- 
ing his will all the time ; it would be requiring of them what 
they could not do. This is an imposition on common sense ; 
it is barbarous, it is heathenish. It is barbarous, because it 
betrays the worst of dispositions ; it is heathenish, because it 
is precisely what the heathens believe of Fate. Who but a 
Calvin, a Westminster Assembly, or some other uninspired 
monster, could be capable of such an inconsistency ? If it is 
asked, was not John Calvin a Christian ? I answer, how can 
we believe it, when he punished Servetus even unto death 
for heresy ? But it will be asked, have not great and good 
men believed this doctrine ? They have ; and great and good 
men are as likely to be in an error as any others ; great and 
good men have believed in witches, and believed witchcraft 
to be a crime deserving death, and punished with death 
those that were supposed to deal in that art. There was a 
time in the last century when the innocent quakers were ar- 
rested by the protestant clergy, and punished with death for 
heresy. 



loi 



SPECIFICATION 2, 

Doctrines advanced in said church on the 6th November, 
1825, in a sermon preached from Galatians hi, 10. as stated 
In transcript No. 2. viz. 

Another description of persons or sect, who derive their 
peculiar doctrine from John Calvin, believe that a portion of 
the human race are determined to eternal misery, and ano- 
ther portion of the human race to eternal happiness; and 
this was all foreordained of God, who knew it from all eter- 
nity, and who makes one portion of his vessels of clay to 
eternal wrath and punishment, and another to eternal honour 
and glory. This is taught under the favourite and appropri- 
ate appellation of election or predestination. My hearers, 
such a cold, chilling, and senseless doctrine as this you must 
not harbour for a moment ; it consists not at all with the at- 
tributes of God, with his divine record ; nor does it in any 
way correspond to that freedom which God has imparted to 
his beings, before whom he has set life and death. Choose 
which thereof you will, God rejoices not in the death of the 
wicked, but that all should turn to him and live ; for why will 
ye die, O house of Israel ! This doctrine is not founded upon 
any safe Scriptural grounds, and therefore must in some 
measure be received as the work of human invention. It 
was not in conformity to such precepts as this, that Christ 
came into this world ; no, my hearers, his object and purpose 
had more the appearance of reason to justify, than can possi- 
bly be brought forward from every source to justify this fa- 
vourite doctrine of Election. 

The above was taken from a sermon delivered in the Pres- 
byterian church of New Orleans, on the 6th March 1826, by 
the Rev. Theodore Clapp, from Gallatians, 3. 10. 

SPECIFICATION 3. 

Doctrine advanced in said church, 26th November, 1826, 
in a sermon from Dan. iv. 35. as stated in transcript No. 3, 
viz. 

November 26th, 1826, the Rev. Theodore Clapp preached 



102 



a sermon from Dan. iv. 35. In this sermon he did declare he 
did not believe in the doctrine of divine decrees, as held and 
taught by John Calvin ; that is, that God, from all eternity, 
hath for his own glory foreordained whatsover cometh to 
pass ; and by an unchangeable decree, from all eternity, for 
his own glory elected some to eternal life and happiness, and 
hath foreordained the rest to an eternal wrath and misery. 
And that the said Theodore Clapp did declare, that those who 
did believe this doctrine were not worthy of being a member 
of any moral or religious society. That this doctrine of John 
Calvin makes a man a mere machine ; and, if it be true, man 
can no more help committing murder by killing, than a steam- 
boat can avoid running foul of another and killing the people 
on board. Mr. Clapp, however, did declare he did believe 
in the doctrine of election and reprobation this way : — that 
God, having a perfect foreknowledge of all things, and know- 
ing from the beginning who would repent, believe in Christ, 
turn from their sins unto holiness, these he did elect to eter- 
nal life and glory ; and all those whom he foreknew would 
not repent, he reprobated ; and that this is the doctrine held 
and taught by his Presbyterian brethren. The said Mr. The- 
odore Clapp did further declare, that John Calvin did act, in 
the forming of his doctrine into a regular system, like a clock- 
maker ; where there was wanted a pin, a screw, or a wheel 
to connect his machine, he would make one. So did John 
Calvin ; when he found it necessary to connect his system of 
doctrine, he did fabricate from his own brain. That John 
Calvin did teach and enforce his doctrine with great energy 
and zeal, in a firm belief that he was right ; and that those who 
did not exactly agree with him in these doctrines, he did pur- 
sue to the stake, pile the faggots around them, and burn their 
bodies for the good of their souls, 

SPECIFICATION 4. 

Doctrine advanced 20th November, 1826, in a sermon 
preached from 3d chapter of St. John : — That all mankind did 
not sin in Adam, and fall with him in his first transgression. 



103 



CHARGE II. 

Advancing opinions on political subjects, highly improper 
and unbecoming a minister of the Gospel. 

SPECIFICATION 1. 

Opinions advanced in said church, 13th August, 1826, in a 
sermon from 2 Chron. xxiv. 15. 16. In speaking of the go- 
vernment of the United States, he declares, that there is no 
question in his mind but that it is as purely administered as is 
compatible with human frailty. At any rate, it is as pure in 
theory, in principle, as that to which angels bow. See his 
printed sermon, page 10. 

SPECIFICATION 2. 

In the same sermon, on page 11, he says, that they who 
would refuse a child the liberty of hearing and judging for it- 
self on the subject of religion, are guilty of gross injustice, and 
are not fit to be members of a free community. 

CHARGE III. 

Advancing opinions on religious subjects not founded on the 
Holy Scriptures, and having a tendency to do harm in leading 
the mind from the word of God into doubtful and erroneous 
views of religious subjects. 

SPECIFICATION 1. 

In a sermon preached in said church on the 19th November, 
1826, from the 2d Epistle of Paul to the Thes. i. 6—9, he 
gave it as his opinion that a very few of the human family 
would be lost, and these few the mere scum of the people. 

SPECIFICATION 2. 

He gave it as his opinion that the Millennium would con- 
tinue about three or four hundred thousand years. 



104 



CHARGE IVe 
Immoral conduct since being a minister of the Gospel 

SPECIFICATION 1. 

In permitting an assembly of free people of colour and 
slaves to meet in the College for the purpose of dancing to 
music of the fiddle, bass drum, tambarine, &c. on Saturday 
night till Sunday morning 4 or 5 o'clock, when he was presi- 
dent of said College. 

SPECIFICATION 2. 

In permitting a large assembly of free people of colour and 

slaves on the last Saturday of for the purpose of 

dancing, playing bass drum, fiddle, &c. which they did till ar- 
rested by the guard at about 11 o'clock. 

CHARGE V. 

Neglect of duty, as minister of the Gospel and pastor of the 
Presbyterian church of this city. 

SPECIFICATION 1. 

In not examining and catechising the baptised children of 
said church. 

SPECIFICATION 2. 

In not visiting the different families of said church, and 
urging and recommending to them the duties of religion in a 
family capacity. 

SPECIFICATION 3. 

In not recommending to the members of said church the 
Confession of Faith and Catechism of said church. 

SPECIFICATION 4. 

In not recommending and using his best endeavours to pro- 
mote prayer meetings, and attending to them himself. 

(Signed) JOHN ROLLINS. 



105 



Also, a list of the following witnesses to substantiate those 
charges, viz. 

On charge I.— The Rev. Mr. James Ranaldson, Dr. Pearse, 
Joshua Baldwin, Peter Laidlaw, Dr. Perlee, John Richards, 
Wesley Coleman, Mr. Rannels, Mr. Nathaniel Smylie, Wil- 
liam Ross, Robert M'Nair. 

On charge II. — His printed sermon, New Orleans, August 
13th, 1826. 

On charge III. — William Ross, Robert M'Nair, Joshua 
Baldwin, Peter Laidlaw, Dr. Perlee. 

On charge IV. — Robert M'Nair, William Ross, Captain of 
the City Guard, Judge Workman, Mr. Mapeau, the Trustees 
of the College of New Orleans, and Mr. Shead. 

On charge V.- — Mrs. Hearsey of the Female Asylum, Mrs. 
Widow Hearsey, Mrs. Davidson, Doctor Davidson's lady, 
Mr. Robert M'Nair and lady, Mr. Huston and lady, Mrs. 
Lloyd, Mr. Hearsey and lady. 

On charge I. and specifications 1, 2, and 3, all relating to 
the doctrine of election, Mr. William Ross and Mr. Robert 
M'Nair, the only remaining elders of the church, were exa- 
mined ; also, Dr. Perlee, John Richards, &c. who stated, that 
in Mr. Theodore Clapp's discourses on that subject they heard 
nothing in opposition to the Confession of Faith, except Mr. 
John Richards, a member of the Baptist church. A written 
sermon, however, purporting to be the substance of the dis- 
courses delivered on that subject, was handed to the Commit- 
tee by Mr. Clapp, and was read before the above witnesses 
and the accuser, who all acknowledged it to contain the sub- 
stance of what they heard Mr. Clapp deliver on the subject of 
foreordination. The Committee, on examining this discourse, 
would remark, that while in the outset it fully set forth God's 
sovereignty as doing his will among the armies of Heaven and 
the inhabitants of the earth, and declared that nothing could 
frustrate his designs or purposes ; yet, in the modus operandi, 
as exhibited in the discourse, Mr. Clapp's expressions might 
be so easily construed as setting forth doctrines in opposition 
to the Confession of Faith, that the Committee were dissatis- 



106 



fled. But knowing that, however proper it may be, in reason- 
ing, to introduce consequences fairly deducible from princi- 
ples to overthrow those principles, yet it is not fair nor proper 
to allege those consequences as the principles of a man when 
he disavows them. The Committee, therefore, addressed to 
Mr. Clapp the following note : 

New Orleans, December 16^, 1826. 
Dear Brother. — -It has been made my duty by my bre- 
thren of the Committee, &c. to make some inquiries relative 
to the discourse delivered by you on March 28th, 1824, and 
repeated November 26th, 1826. As a complete view of the 
doctrine of Election, the Committee are not satisfied with 
the written discourse which you have had the goodness to put 
into their hands. They would be glad to hear from you the 
objects you had in view in the delivery of those discourses, 
and the occasions which called them forth ; as they have no 
doubts but these may serve in a great measure to explain the 
general drift of the discourse, and the peculiar language of 
some parts of it. 

Your Brother, 

GEORGE POTTS. 

Rev. Theodore Clapp. 

In answer to which, the Committee received the follow- 
ing, viz. 

New Orleans, December 16th, 1826. 
Dear Brother. — With reference to the sermon on Elec- 
tion, with which a Committee of the Mississippi Presbytery, 
after careful examination, have expressed themselves dissatis- 
fied and requested some explanation, I gladly embrace this 
opportunity to observe, that it was delivered extemporane- 
ously, and without that cautious, definite, and precise use of 
language which the discussion of so important and difficult a 
subject demands, and which I might have more nearly ap- 
proached to had I been calmly seated to study in my closet. 
My object in preaching it, was to remove the false views 
which I supposed were entertained by some of my congre- 



107 



gation relative to the doctrine of Election, and to show that 
the Sacred Scriptures do not teach us that God has the same 
agency in the production of sinful actions as in the produc- 
tion of holy actions. My belief is, which I intended to ex- 
hibit, that God upholds and governs all things so as to bring 
about his eternal purposes, (those purposes for which the uni- 
verse was made,) without infringing on liberty of action in 
man. 

A sermon had been preached in my pulpit, in which it was 
stated to be an article of the Creed of the Presbyterian 
church, that God had from eternity determined, by an al- 
mighty, absolute decree, all the actions of each individual of 
the human race, both those that are sinful as well as those 
which are holy. I did not conceive this to be the doctrine 
of our church ;> I think it correct to say, that God from eter- 
nity has chosen some to everlasting life, and permitted the 
remainder to go on in sin to everlasting misery. I believe 
the doctrine of Election is most true and important ; I be- 
lieve it is impossible for an intelligent being to act without 
choosing, willing, receiving and rejecting, approving and 
disapproving, without having an end or ends in view. If, in 
the sermon before the Committee, there is any language cal- 
culated to make a wrong impression on the majority of those 
who heard it, I can only say it was unintentional, and must 
be imputed to the inadvertence, and hurry, and want of time 
for reflection, to which extemporaneous speakers are sub- 
jected. I preached the sermon the second time as I deliver- 
ed it at first, that I might not do injustice to those who ani- 
madverted on it ; and that if I had been justly censured, it 
might thus appear to the Committee. The transcripts, as 
they are called, or extracts from notes said to have been 
taken of my sermons on Election at the time, are neither fair 
exhibitions of the ideas which were advanced nor of the lan- 
guage by which they were conveyed. It has been stated to 
the Committee, that I declared, in a sermon on Regeneration , 
that all mankind did not sin and fall with Adam in his first 
transgression. This is not correct ; I was endeavouring to 
prove the necessity of regeneration from the universal depra- 



108 

vity of mankind, which I said must be traced to the apostacy 
of our first parents ; I observed that I did not think it expe- 
dient to advocate on that occasion any peculiar sectarian 
views of original sin ; all that I wished to insist on, was the 
general fact as stated by Paul in Romans, " That by one man 
" sin entered the world, and death by sin ;" and that, in con- 
sequence of Adam's first sin, all of woman born are exposed 
to death temporal, spiritual, and eternal. 

I can cordially subscribe to the articles contained in the 3d 
chapter of the Confession of Faith, (though I think the lan- 
guage not the happiest,) if it be understood that God so or- 
dains whatsoever comes to pass, that he is thereby neither 
the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the 
creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes 
taken away, but rather established. 

Your Brother, 

THEODORE CLAPP. 

Rev. George Potts, present. 

On Specification No. 4. the Committee remark, that the 
witnesses had no recollection of his preaching the doctrine 
specified. 

CHARGE II. AND SPECIFICATIONS NOS. 1 & 2. 

On this charge the Committee made but little inquiry, as 
the accuser referred to a printed sermon and the particular 
pages. 

CHARGE III. — AND SPECIFICATIONS NOS. 1 & 2. 

This charge was denied by Mr. Clapp ; but the specifica- 
tions, though not in phraseology, yet in substance, admitted. 

CHARGE IV. AND SPECIFICATIONS NOS. I & 2. 

The Committee acquired all the information on this sub- 
ject that was thought by them necessary, both from the mem- 
bers of the church and the Board of Administrators of the 
College, particularly judge James Workman, President of the 
Board. The Committee do not think it necessary to detail 



109 



all the particulars of the history of those specifications ; but 
would simply remark, as the result of their investigation, that 
Mr. Clapp is entirely exonerated from the charge of encou- 
raging such meetings as those alluded to, and that his congre- 
gation so understand it. 

CHARGE V. AND SPECIFICATIONS NOS. 1, % 3 & 4. 

The Committee would remark on this charge generally, 
that Mr. Clapp is a man of family, and must necessarily, in a 
place situated as New Orleans is, in relation to its inhabitants, 
very few of whom and of whose families are stationary, be 
subjected to an uncommon portion of cares and avocations, 
which are not the unhappy lot of but few ministers, and 
which break in on parochial duties, but which are absolutely 
necessary for the support of his family. In Catechetical in- 
struction he is assisted by his Elders ; prayer meetings he at- 
tends and encourages ; the Confession of Faith he represents 
as the best exhibition of Scripture doctrine with which he is 
acquainted of human compositions. His congregation gene- 
rally, and so far as your Committee could ascertain, almost 
universally love him ; they represent him in the light of one 
feeling a very deep interest in the salvation of their souls, and 
for this end giving himself much to study. The intelligent re- 
gret that he cannot often visit them in their families, and the 
less intelligent complain, and say they certainly ought to have 
more of the company of the man they love. The Committee 
would farther remark that the accuser is under process, which 
has not yet been issued, but suspended to give him time to re- 
flect, as appears from the church records ; and further, on 
testimony of the members of the session, the Committee were 
assured that the accuser absolutely refused to have any con- 
ference with the accused upon the subject of amicable ad- 
justment, but declared his determination to arraign him be- 
fore a competent ecclesiastical tribunal. 

In conclusion, the Committee, having had frequent conver- 
sations with Mr. Clapp on the doctrines of divine sovereignty 
and human depravity, think themselves called upon to give 
their testimony in this place to his decided and cordial ap- 



110 



proval of those doctrines ; his zeal in the discharge of mi- 
nisterial duties, so far as the peculiarity of his circumstances! 
would admit of ; his firm hold on the affection and esteem of 
his people, and the spirit of union and fraternal love mani- 
fested by him toward his brethren of the ministry. 

(Signed) JAMES SMYLIE, ) 

GEORGE POTTS, i Committee. 

JOHN H. VANCOURT, ) 

On motion, resolved, that the report be received and the 
Committee discharged. 

On motion, resolved, that a Committee be appointed to 
draft a minute on the subject. The moderator appointed 
Messrs. Hunter, Montgomery, and Chase, said Committee. 

The Committee, appointed to draft a minute with respect 
to the charges preferred against the Rev. Theodore Clapp, 
reported the following, which was received and adopted, viz. 

The Presbytery having attended to the report of the Com- 
mittee, find that the charges preferred against the Rev. The- 
odore Clapp relate, 1st, to incorrectness of sentiments ; and 
!2d, to incorrectness of ministerial conduct. In relation to the 
first, while from the evidence before them they feel con- 
strained to condemn his phraseology as incautious and incor- 
rect, they do not perceive any absolute and essential diffe- 
rence between his views in relation to the doctrines of Di- 
vine Foreknowledge and those of our Confession of Faith. 
In relation to the 2d, they are perfectly satisfied of his inno- 
cence. They feel themselves called upon here to bear testi- 
mony to the high standing of Mr. Clapp with his congrega- 
tion, and to express their ardent hope that he may be 
strengthened and encouraged, and both himself and the peo- 
ple of his charge be blessed with the influence of God's Holy 
Spirit. 

Pisgah Church, April Sth s 9 o'clock A. M. 1830. 
A letter from the Rev. Theodore Clapp was received and 
read, and is as follows : 



ill 

K To the Moderator of the Mississippi Presbytery. 

Mew Orleans, March 5th, 1830* 

Dear Sir. — For some years past I have been employed in 
preparing for publication a work on the essential doctrines and 
duties of Christianity. The characteristical feature of the 
work is the admission of no proof texts but such as will bear 
the rigid unsparing scrutiny of modern exigesis. I have not 
yet found, and at present despair of finding, any texts of Holy 
Writ to prove, unanswerably, the distinguishing tenets of Cal- 
vinism. The leading principles of the Calvinists I suppose 
to be the following : — Unconditional Election of part of man- 
kind to eternal life, and eternal reprobation of the remainder; 
that an atonement has been made for the sins of the elect only ; 
that Adam's sin was imputed to his posterity in such a manner 
that all of them, as soon as they are born, are deserving of 
death temporal, spiritual, and eternal, and without divine 
grace would grow up utterly indisposed and unable to obey 
the law of God. — Irresistible grace : the entire passiveness of 
the soul in conversion, and that those once converted and 
sanctified shall never finally fall from grace. At present I 
disbelieve, and feel it my duty to preach against, each and all 
of the doctrines above specified. Suspecting that my brethren 
in the ministry belonging to this section of the country will 
regard my present views as an essential departure from the 
generally acknowledged and distinguishing tenets of the Pres- 
byterian church, I hereby solicit a dismission from the Missis- 
sippi Presbytery, that I may join the Hampshire County As- 
sociation of Congregational ministers in the State of Massa- 
chusetts, (the same body to which I belonged when I first 
came to New Orleans.) I will also add, that so numerous 
and pressing are my engagements, that were my connexion 
with the Presbytery to be continued, I should be unable to at- 
tend their meetings, and of course be justly regarded as an 
useless member of your body. I wish to withdraw from the 
Presbytery, simply because it seems to me that the peace and 
prosperity of your church in Louisiana and Mississippi re- 
quire it. It gives me pain to be obliged to differ from my 



112 



ministerial brethren with respect to points deemed by many # 
essential ; but since this difference exists, I doubt not but 
they will concur in the opinion that the course I am pursuing 
is the course of duty. In the opinion of the Presbytery I am 
not pastor of the First Presbyterian church, New Orleans, for 
they have generally reported me to General Assembly as a 
stated supply. The dissolution of this relation, I suppose, does 
not require a vote of the church and congregation. The 
church and congregation here are willing that I should take 
my own course, though the church will probably wish to re- 
main under care of the Presbytery, notwithstanding I am dis- 
missed. The Presbyterian church has hitherto managed its 
affairs with much wisdom and prudence ; may God continue 
to bless it, and make it a mighty instrument in promoting truth 
and holiness throughout the United States and the world. 
I am, dear Sir, respectfully and sincerely yours, 

THEODORE CLAPP." 

Messrs. William Montgomery, Dorrance, Vancourt, and 
Chase, were appointed a Committee to draft a minute in re- 
lation to the above letter, and report during the present ses- 
sion. 

Rev. J. Dorrance, and Mr. Saturfield, were appointed a 
Committee to draft a report to the General Assembly. 

Friday morning, 9 o'clock. 
The Committee appointed to draft a minute in relation to 
the letter of the Rev. Theodore Clapp, reported, and their re- 
port was accepted and adopted, and is as follows ; viz. The 
Committee, &c. recommend the adoption of the following 
resolutions : 

1st. Resolved, that we fully agree with the Rev. Mr. Clapp, 
that a regard to the peace and prosperity of the Presbyterian 
church requires his separation from it. 

2d. Resolved, that we consider the reason assigned, viz. 
such a change in the doctrinal sentiments of the said Rev. 
Theodore Clapp, as he very justly suspects his brethren in the 

* May in the original letter. 



113 



ministry will regard as an essential departure from the gene* 
rally acknowledged and distinguishing tenets of the Presbyte- 
rian church, a sufficient ground for dissolving his connexion 
with this body ; the more especially as he feels it his duty to 
preach against each and all of the doctrines deemed by him 
peculiar to the Presbyterian church. 

3d. Resolved, that as it would be improper for any person, 
holding the sentiments avowed in the letter of the Rev. Theo- 
dore Clapp, to remain a member of this Presbytery, so it would 
be inconsistent for us to grant him a regular dismission to join 
any ecclesiastical body with which we maintain fraternal cor- 
respondence. 

4th. Resolved, that, in accordance with the above resolu- 
tions, the Rev. Theodore Clapp be, and hereby is, no longer 
either a member of this body or a minister of the Presbyterian 
church. 

The stated clerk was then ordered to furnish Theodore 
Clapp with a copy of the above resolutions. 

Rev. Messrs. J. Smylie and J. Chamberlain were added to 
the Committee, and directed to prepare a pastoral letter to be 
sent to the first Presbyterian church, New Orleans. 

Saturday morning, half-past 8 o'clock. 
The Committee appointed to draft a pastoral letter to the 
first Presbyterian church, New Orleans, in relation to the 
withdrawal of the Rev. Theodore Clapp from Presbytery, re- 
ported, and their report was accepted and adopted, and is as 
follows: viz. 

To the First Presbyterian church of the city and parish of 
New Orleans. 

Dear Brethren. — The Presbytery of Mississippi have this 
day been called upon to dissolve the connexion which has 
heretofore existed between themselves and Rev. Theodore 
Clapp, who, for several years last past has been a member of 
this body, and has acted as your stated supply. It is the duty 
of the Presbytery to state to you the situation in which you 
are placed by this act, and also the reasons which have led to 



114 



iu In the performance of this duty, it will be necessary to 
give you a succinct history of the prominent facts relative to 
Mr. Clapp's connexion with this Presbytery. Mr. Clapp, hav- 
ing been previously received, appeared and took his seat, as a 
member of the Presbytery, for the first time at their meeting 
in the spring of 1824, and, in consequence of a common ru- 
mour having been widely circulated that his theological views 
were not in unison with the views of the Presbyterian church, 
the Presbytery, feeling it their duty, both for the sake of peace 
in their own body, and also of removing all unwarrantable 
opinions and unfounded suspicions respecting his theological 
sentiments, ^ interrogate him very strictly in relation to his 
adoption of the Confession of Faith and Book of Discipline of 
the Presbyterian church ; and he, in the presence of the Pres- 
bytery and with much solemnity, did " receive and adopt the 
" Confession of Faith of the Presbyterian church as contain- 
" ing the system of doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures ;" 
and he did declare his approbation of the government, and did 
adopt the Book of Discipline, of the Presbyterian church. 
This was all done without any expressed reservation. Within 
a few weeks after the adjournment of the Presbytery, rumours 
reached the members that Mr. Clapp did ridicule several doc- 
trines recognized as Scriptural by the Presbyterian church, 
and did publicly denounce them from the pulpit, even after 
becoming a member of the Presbytery. Little attention, 
however, was paid to those reports further than to elicit free 
conversation, with him on these subjects, until the fall of 1826, 
when a complaint, accompanied by charges and specifications 
against him, was made to the Presbytery by Dr. John Rollins. 
With a view to act with perfect tenderness towards Mr. Clapp, 
at the same time with faithfulness, they appointed a Commit- 
tee to visit New Orleans and investigate the charges which 
were made, before any formal charges would be received 
against him. This Committee visited New Orleans, and pa- 
tiently heard all the testimony in the case which was present- 
ed by both parties ; and, although acting under the influence 
of strong affection for Mr. Clapp, they were compelled to ex- 
press to him their disapprobation of the sentiments contained 



115 



in a sermon submitted by him to the Committee, and confes- 
sedly by all parties, laying the foundation, in part, for the 
charges which were preferred against him ; the expression 
of which disapprobation called from him a letter, contained in 
Record, vol. iii. pages 46, 50.* This letter, together with 
many free and particular conversations with him, in which 
the following remark was made, and was proved by the elders 
and others of the congregation to have been frequently made 
by him, viz : " the Confession of Faith is the best exhibition 
" of Scriptural doctrine with which I am acquainted of human 
" composition," induced the Committee to make a report to the 
Presbytery entirely favourable to him, and which report con- 
cludes in the following words, viz. See page 53. vol. iii.t 
This Committee reported to the Presbytery at their meeting 
on the 31st of January, 1827, and the report was approved 
and the Committee was discharged. 

The next meeting of the Presbytery was held in New Or- 
leans, in April 1827, with a special reference to reconcile all 
parties, and to remove all suspicions against the opinions of 
the Rev. Theodore Clapp which might exist in the minds of 
any of the congregation or the public. At this meeting the 
members of the Presbytery received additional evidence to 
believe that Mr. Clapp did receive and adopt the Confession 
of Faith and Book of Discipline, and they accordingly express- 
ed their confidence in him by appointing him Chairman of im- 
portant Committees. 

Within a few weeks after the adjournment of the Presby- 
tery, rumours again reached the ears of some of the members 
that he had again preached against the doctrines contained 
in the Confession of Faith. These reports again elicited 
many free and particular conversations with him, which re- 
sulted in his favour ; and at the meeting of the Presbytery at 
Port Gibson, in April 1828, he was present, and in a con- 
versation held by the Presbytery on the doctrines of Calvin- 
ism as received by the Presbyterian church, he said, " that in 
" orthodoxy he would not yield to any member of the Presby- 

* See pages 106, 107, 108. f See page 110. 

17 



116 



" tery." At the same meeting, he preached a sermon, in 
which he asserted and maintained the doctrine of the final 
perseverance of the saints as held by the Presbyterian 
church. 

He attended the meeting of the Presbytery again in the 
fall of 1828 ; no dissatisfaction with the doctrines of the 
church, or any of them, was expressed by him at that time. 

In the spring of 1829, conversations were held with him 
by several of the members of the Presbytery at different 
times in the city of New Orleans, on several important doc- 
trines contained in the Confession of Faith. In these con- 
versations he expressed his doubts of the truth of those doc- 
trines, but remarked that he would not preach against them ; 
and when told that it would be inconsistent for him to re- 
main in the Presbyterian church with his present sentiments, 
he did declare his sentiments in substance, and almost verba- 
tim, as they are expressed in the conclusion of his letter to 
the Committee of investigation already quoted. Little inter- 
course between him and the members of the Presbytery has 
taken place since that time until within a few weeks ; and on 
the 7th day of the present month the following letter was re- 
ceived, addressed to the moderator, dated New Orleans, 5th 
March, 1830, and of which the following is an extract. See 
the letter on pages 28 — 30, vol. iv.* After the reading of 
the above letter, it was placed in the hands of a Committee, 
who, after careful consideration, reported the following reso- 
lutions, which were adopted by the Presbytery, viz. See 
pages 35 & 36, vol. iv.t 

On review of this history, the Presbytery, in duty to them- 
selves, make the following remarks : 

1st. That they do most solemnly declare, that they have 
acted according to their serious convictions, in all their pro- 
ceedings with the Rev. Theodore Clapp, with great tender- 
ness and brotherly love. 

2d. That they do respect his talents, learning, and elo- 
quence ; and did fondly hope that he was qualified in an emi- 



* See pages 111, 112. 



tSee pages 112, 113. 



117 

&ent degree to be extensively useful in your city, and that he 
was ardently loved by those members of the Presbytery with 
whom he was intimate. 

3d. That they are constrained to say, that he has acted to- 
wards them in a manner entirely inexplicable. They have 
been frequently impelled by duty to call upon him for a full 
and candid declaration of his theological sentiments ; they 
have felt even a delicacy in requiring him so repeatedly to 
answer in relation to his views on the same doctrines. His 
declarations were always full, and apparently with unfeigned 
candour, and were satisfactory ; and while it is true that some 
few members had reason, in the summer of 1829, to fear that 
he was departing from the doctrines which he had frequently 
and solemnly avowed were Scriptural, yet, as a Presbytery, 
they were bound to believe, that from the spring of 1824 un- 
til the present meeting, his views were in accordance with 
their own ; whilst for several years his sentiments really were, 
and his public preaching in his own pulpit appears to have 
been, very different, as is now confirmed by his own letter 
and other authentic sources. In all this there appears to be 
a great want of candour, and much trifling with the Presby- 
tery on a solemn subject. 

4th. That the Presbytery have been called upon more than 
once to settle difficulties existing between him and some 
members of your congregation on these same doctrines, and 
his decided avowal of them, officially made, had gained for 
him the support and confidence of the Presbytery. These dif- 
ficulties have now been the subject of inquiry and judicial 
proceeding in some form or other for four years, while in the 
mean time the Presbytery have been induced to believe that 
he had given no cause of complaint ; the fears which might 
have existed were silenced, until the congregation has been 
greatly enlarged under the preaching of such sentiments as 
he by his letter has avowed, and which are inconsistent with 
his previous solemn declarations. The Presbytery cannot 
pretend to assign a reason for a course of conduct which to 
them appears so glaringly in opposition to Christian candour 
and honesty. 



118 



5th. That the Presbytery express no opposition to the sen- 
timent, that every man has a right to change his theological 
opinions whenever he conscientiously thinks he has evidence to 
do so; but they do express their most decided disapprobation 
of a man's preaching one set of opinions while he officially 
avows the opposite. Unity of sentiment and conduct must lay 
the foundation of peace in the church, or in any branch of it. 
For this purpose we have a tangible and publicly acknow- 
ledged expression of our belief of the doctrines of the Bible 
in the Confession of Faith. Mr. Clapp not only rejects many 
doctrines which we acknowledge to be in our system of di- 
vine truth, but he has also perverted others, and ascribed 
others to us which we reject. The Presbytery cannot at this 
time enter into a discussion of the truth of these doctrines, 
but would only remark, that they do most sincerely believe 
that the Confession of Faith does contain the system of divine 
truth as taught in the Scriptures. 

6th. That the Presbytery do not pretend to pass a vote of 
censure upon the Rev. Theodore Clapp so as to take from 
him any of his rights as a minister of the gospel ; they simply 
meet him upon his own ground, and whilst he expresses his 
part they express theirs. 

7th. That as he is no longer a member of this Presbytery, 
nor a minister of the Presbyterian church, it is our duty, ac- 
cording to the discipline of the church, to declare your con- 
gregation vacant. 

8th. That the Presbytery regret extremely that no letter 
has been received from the congregation on this subject ; but 
nevertheless as Mr. Clapp has stated that " the church will 
"probably wish to remain under the care of the Presbytery" it 
is taken as the expression of the will of the church. 

In conclusion, the Presbytery would remark, that they re- 
gret the painful necessity of dissolving a connexion which of- 
ficially separates you from a man whom you have loved, and 
many of you still love ; but from your situation you are des- 
tined to exert an influence, not only on all our churches, but 
upon all the churches of the western and southern country. 
Your faithful adherence to the doctrines and duties set forth 



119 



hi the Holy Scriptures will be the means of saving millions* 
or of dragging thousands down to misery and eternal despair % 
you still stand connected with the Mississippi Presbytery, 
and that connexion shall not be dissolved but by your own 
voluntary act. We will co-operate with you in all your ef- 
forts to build up in your city the kingdom of our dear Re- 
deemer, to whose protection and tender care we commit you, 
and to whom be glory forever, Amen. 

Resolved, that the Rev. George Potts and the Rev. Ben- 
jamin Chase, or either of them, be a Committee to carry and 
read the above pastoral letter to the first Presbyterian church 
of the city and parish of New Orleans. 

Friendship Church, October 13th, 1830. 

The stated clerk reported compliance with the directions 
of the Presbytery, to furnish the Rev. Theodore Clapp with 
a copy of the resolutions of the Presbytery in his case. 

The Committee appointed to carry and read the pastoral 
letter to the first Presbyterian church in New Orleans, re- 
ported compliance. 

Bethel, March Zlst, 1831. 
A letter from the Rev. Theodore Clapp, addressed to the 
moderator of the Presbytery was read, and, on motion, it was 
resolved that it should lie on the table. 

Port Gibson, Thursday, October 13fA, 1831. 
The following communication was received from the Rev. 
Theodore Clapp, viz. 

" To the Mississippi Presbytery. 
4< Brethren. — I agree that the following is a correct copy 
of the resolutions of the late General Assembly in my case, 
and request that they may be received and acted upon as 
such by the Mississippi Presbytery. The resolutions are as 
follows, viz. Resolved, that since the Rev. Theodore Clapp 
has neither been dismissed nor suspended by the Presbytery 
of Mississippi, he ought to be regarded as a member of that 
body, and amenable to them for all errors either in doctrine 



120 



or deportment ; and in the opinion of the Assembly, they have 
sufficient reasons for proceeding to try him upon the charge 
of error in doctrine. Resolved, that as Mr. Clapp was mere- 
ly a stated supply of the church in New Orleans, the Presby- 
tery of Mississippi had a right, and it was their duty under ex- 
isting circumstances, to adopt measures to detach him from 
the church. 

THEODORE CLAPP." 

" October 13th, 1831, Port Gibson*" 

Resolved, that as no copy of the resolutions of the last Ge- 
neral Assembly, certified by the stated clerk of the Assembly, 
has been received by the Presbytery, the Presbytery, under 
existing circumstances, do agree to the request of Rev. Theo- 
dore Clapp as contained in the above communication, and 
waive the usual formality ; Resolved, therefore, that the Rev. 
Theodore Clapp be now recognized as a member of this Pres- 
bytery, in conformity with the above resolutions of the As- 
sembly. 

Resolved, that the Rev. Theodore Clapp's letter of March 
5th, 1830, be now considered as before this Presbytery ; and 
that Messrs. Potts, Smylie, and Vancourt, be a Committee to 
take the matter into consideration. 

Friday, October 14th, 1831, 9 o'clock, A. M. 
The following communication was received from the Rev. 
Theodore Clapp, the consideration of which, after considera- 
ble discussion, was postponed, viz. 

" To the Moderator of the Mississippi Presbytery. 
" Reverend and Dear Sir. — My letter of March 5th, 1830, 
containing a request to be dismissed from your body to join 
the Hampshire Association of Congregational ministers in 
the State of Massachusetts, and also the reasons for that re- 
quest, being before your body, I hereby solicit permission to 
withdraw that letter, inasmuch as it does not contain a fair 
representation of my present views ; provided it may appear, 
after the explanations that may be given, that I have not, as 



121 



was supposed, essentially departed from the generally ac- 
knowledged and distinguishing tenets of the Presbyterian 
church. 

THEODORE CLAPP." 
" Port Gibson, October Uth, 1831." 

The Committee appointed to take into consideration the 
resolutions of the General Assembly in relation to the Rev. 
Theodore Clapp and the first Presbyterian church in New 
Orleans, made their report, which was accepted, and after 
discussion adopted, and is as follows, viz. 

" The Committee, &c. report, that those resolutions decide 
that the proceedings of the Presbytery, by which the Rev* 
Mr. Clapp was declared no longer a member of this Presby- 
tery nor a minister of the Presbyterian church, were incor- 
rect, inasmuch as he had not been dismissed nor suspended ; 
and that, in consequence, Mr. Clapp was to be considered still 
as a member of this Presbytery and amenable to the Presby- 
tery for all errors in doctrine or deportment. Furthermore, 
the decision of the Assembly declares that we have sufficient 
reasons for proceeding to try him for errors in doctrine. 

" The Presbytery, as in duty bound, submit to the decision of 
the supreme judicatory, although they may be permitted to 
express their regret that the Assembly had not confirmed their 
proceedings. Such a confirmation would have secured, in 
their opinion, the peace of the church in this quarter, by ef- 
fecting a separation between them and a minister of their 
number, who, although not found essentially unsound, (as they 
then conceived,) had expressly declared that he " disbelieved, 
" and felt it his duty to preach" against, doctrines, some of 
which are important truths of the Sacred Scriptures, and em- 
bodied in our church standards. 

" Your Committee are of opinion, that the spirit and positive 
regulations of our church admit of the withdrawal of indivi- 
duals, who, having changed their views of some of our doc- 
trines, wish to retire from our connexion, unless the doctrines 
in question be among the essential and fundamental truths of 
the Gospel as maintained by all evangelical churches ; in which 



122 



ease the errors are of such a nature as to call for suspension, 
and (unless penitence and retraction,) ultimate deposition from 
the ministry. There was no evidence, at the time of Mr. 
Clapp 's request for dismission, of such fundamental departures 
from the truth, but only of such a departure as rendered it 
both improper in itself and inexpedient that he should be any 
longer in connexion of the Presbyterian church as one of its 
teachers. His request to be dismissed in good standing, to 
join a congregational body in direct fraternal correspondence 
with us, (a correspondence based on avowed agreement in 
doctrine,) was considered to be as much incompatible with 
our obligations and regulations as if he had requested to be dis- 
missed to unite with a sister Presbytery. Hence this request 
was refused, and Mr. Clapp declared to be no longer a minis- 
ter in our connexion. From this decision it was Mr. Clapp's 
right to appeal, if he had so chosen. No appeal, however, 
was made, but he still continued to officiate as stated supply 
to one of the churches which had solemnly placed itself under 
our care, and for whose spiritual interests we held ourselves 
in a degree accountable so long as they did not voluntarily 
withdraw from us. It was thought to be necessary that the 
Presbytery should perform their duty to this church ; and ac- 
cordingly, a meeting of the Presbytery was held in New Or- 
leans on January 25th, 1831, at which time measures were 
taken to ascertain what portion of the church would retain 
Mr. Clapp as their stated supply, and a distinct intimation was 
given to the session that it was irregular and unconstitutional 
that a church in our connexion should retain, as pastor or stated 
supply, a minister totally unconnected with the Presbyterian 
church. A portion of the church and a majority of the ses- 
sion acquiesced in the views expressed by the Presbytery ; 
but a minority of the session entered a protest and complaint, 
with a request that this Presbytery would consent to refer the 
matter directly to the adjudication of the General Assembly. 
This consent was granted, and the result is the resolutions 
now under consideration. It appears, therefore, that the Rev. 
Theodore Clapp refuses to be disconnected from the Presby- 
terian church, unless with such dismission as would certify his 



123 



good standing, by which is meant not merely his moral but his 
ecclesiastical soundness ; and, in case such a dismission be re- 
fused, he has virtually claimed a trial. His claim for a trial, 
your Committee conceives, would not have been rejected by 
the Presbytery if it had been made known to them at the pro- 
per time ; and your Committee supposes that the Presbytery 
will now be ready to prove that their former decision in his 
case was not caused by an unwillingness to do him entire jus- 
tice. The resolutions of the Assembly, which seem to be 
based upon Mr. Clapp's claim of connexion with the Presby- 
terian church, now put it in your power to shew that the 
Presbytery will not shrink from their duty. They did, indeed, 
entertain the hope, that the tranquillity and purity of our 
church would be best secured by the measures which they 
first adopted, and that Mr. Clapp would acquiesce in the pro- 
priety and expediency of that measure. This hope, greatly 
to their regret, has been disappointed, and the peace of the 
church disturbed. A trial has been demanded, a quiet sepa- 
ration refused ; and it only remains to obey the resolutions of 
the Assembly, and, for errors in doctrine and deportment, ef- 
fect a separation according to the more regular form of disci- 
pline. 

" Your Committee, therefore, taking into view the interests 
of the church committed to their oversight, recommend that 
immediate measures be taken to carry into effect the resolu- 
tions of the Assembly ; and that a Committee of prosecution 
be appointed to prepare charges against the Rev. Theodore 
Clapp, whose letter of March 5th, 1830, is now before the 
Presbytery, in which is contained his disavowal of his belief 
in some doctrines deemed important parts of the truths of 
God as maintained by the Presbyterian church, and solemnly 
received by all who enter our church as teachers. 

GEORGE POTTS, Chairman." 

" October Uth, 1831." 

Resolved, that, agreeable to the recommendation of the 
above report, the Rev. Messrs. Potts and Vancourt be a Com- 
mittee to prepare charges against the Rev. Theodore Clapp. 

18 



124 



Saturday, October \bth, 1831, half-past % P. M. 
A letter, directed to the moderator of the Mississippi Pres- 
bytery from the Rev. Theodore Clapp, was received, and com- 
mitted to Messrs. Donan, Newton, and Moore. The follow- 
ing is a copy : viz. 

" Port Gibson, October 14//*, 1831. 

" Reverend and Dear Sir. — Through you I beg leave to 
communicate to my brethren of the Mississippi Presbytery 
some thoughts respecting the doctrinal views expressed in my 
letter to the above-mentioned body, dated March 5th, 1830. 

" 1st. In that letter I avowed my disbelief of the doctrine 
of unconditional election and reprobation. I have for some 
years considered the phraseology * unconditional election and 
reprobation* to be synonymous with supralapsarianism ; I 
understand a supralapsarian to be, one who holds that God, 
antecedent to the fall of man or any knowledge of it, de- 
creed the apostacy and all its consequences ; determining to 
save some and condemn others ; and that in all these, he con- 
siders his own glory only. Now, I cannot see how God could 
decree a thing antecedently to his knowing it ; I find no such 
doctrine in the Bible. I do not like the word 4 decrees,' but 
am not disposed to quarrel about mere terms. I adopt, and 
always have adopted, the definition of Election prevalent in 
New England when I lived there, and now prevalent, as I be- 
lieve, not only there throght* the Presbyterian church. It is 
as follows : — all of God's works are according to a plan ; or, 
in other words, all things existing throughout the universe of 
God are accordant with his infinite, eternal, and incompre- 
hensible plan or purposes. I do not mean that every thing 
which occurs is agreeable with the holy will of God as it re- 
gards moral character ; but simply, that nothing takes place 
unforeseen by God, — unprovided for, — or in opposition to the 
immense, boundless, and unsearchable scheme of the divine 
operations. I can subscribe to the chapter on decrees inas- 
much as it affirms that God foreordains whatsoever comes to 

* Throughout supposed to be intended 



125 



pass in such a manner that he is not the author of sin, does not 
take away the contingency of events or second causes, and 
does not infringe on the free agency of man. 

" 2d, In my letter of March 5th, 1830, 1 avowed my dis- 
belief of the doctrine of a definite atonement. My belief is, 
that the atonement is general, that is, sufficient for all man- 
kind, and actually designed for as many as will believe. 

" 3d. Calvin believed in the imputation of Adam's sin to 
his posterity. I adopt the opinion of Ferretine, — that the sin 
of Adam cannot be properly or personally ours, because we 
were not yet personally in existence. I conceive it is not cor- 
rect to say that a person sinned before he had existence ; but 
I believe that, in consequence of Adam's fall, all mankind 
come into existence destitute of evangelical holiness ; become 
sinners as soon as they are capable of it ; and that, unless pre- 
vented by the sovereign, distinguishing, and unmerited grace 
of God through Christ, would go on sinning forever, and be 
forever wretched. The Biblical Repertory for July, 1830, 
avers that by the phraseology, 4 imputation of Adam's sin/ 
our church does not understand that all mankind are actually 
identified with Adam in his first transgression, nor that there 
is any transfer of the moral turpitude of Adam's sin to his 
posterity. With the above explanation I can cordially sub- 
scribe to the doctrine of the imputation of original sin. 

" 4th. Calvin believed in irresistible grace. My belief is, 
that the Holy Spirit regenerates the soul in conversion, 
breathes into it a new, holy, spiritual principle of life ; but I 
doubt the propriety of applying the epithet 4 irresistible' to the 
divine influences concerned in regeneration. On this subject 
I adopt the views expressed in Dwight's Theology, vol. iii. p. 
39. viz. — that in all cases of actual conversion, the influences 
of the Spirit are irresistible. Farther, I believe that in all cases 
of conversion, the soul is active ; that is, acted upon in ac- 
cordance with the laws of mind. 

44 5lh. With respect to the final perseverance of the saints, 
the views which are held the winter before last, are imper- 
fectly expressed in my letter to the Presbytery dated March 
5th, 1830. I then believed that real Christians do sometimes 



126 



fall from grace in this life, but that none once truly converted 
will be finally and forever lost. At the same time I believed 
that the doctrine as above stated could not be proved from 
Scripture ; in other words, I thought that reason was in fa- 
vour of it, but that the Bible had left it undecided. The loose 
way in which I then expressed myself arose from haste ; I be- 
lieve I did not read the letter after it was written, took no 
copy of it, and did not suspect that it would be recorded 
against me as proof of heresy, and circulated, without note or 
comment, throughout the United States. Within the last year 

1 have examined the scriptural position of this doctrine, and 
after much diligent search, and, I hope, earnest prayer, have 
come to the conclusion that it is supported by the following 
texts of Scripture : John x. 24, 26, 37 ; x. 9 ; Rom. xi. 29 ; 

2 Tim. ii. 19. On the other hand, there are some texts against 
the doctrine, which I cannot explain, but do not on that ac- 
count conclude that they are inexplicable. At the present 
time I believe the doctrines of election, original sin, atone- 
ment, regeneration, and perseverance of the saints, as above 
explained ; nor has there been any material change of my 
views on the above points that I am conscious of since my 
letter to the Presbytery, March 5th, 1830, except with re- 
spect to the last-mentioned article. I could name several 
Presbyterian clergymen who have told me, that in their 
opinion subscription to the last-named article should not be 
regarded as essential to a standing in the Presbyterian church. 
Does not that great and good man, Robert Hall, so decide, 
when he says that no error of doctrine, not incompatible with 
salvation, should be considered as legitimate grounds for de- 
barring from the privileges of the church ? I hope the above 
explanation and confession of faith will satisfy my brethren 
that my views concerning the essential doctrines of religion 
are not unsound. 

" I am, dear Sir, respectfully and affectionately yours, 

" THEODORE CLAPP." 



127 



Monday, October 17th, 8 o'clock. 

The Committee to whom was referred the letter of the 
Rev. Theodore Clapp of October 14th, 1831, presented their 
report, which is as follows, viz. 

" The Committee, &c. report, that upon the examination of 
his letter, and personal conference with him, the result of which 
is hereunto appended, (see paper A.) it is their opinion 
that there is no such essential difference between his views 
and ours as disqualify him for continuing as a member of our 
church. 

-PETER DQNAN,> Committee „ 
"A. NEWTON, S 

" October 17th, 1831." 

(Paper A.) viz. 

Do you believe that there are three persons in the God- 
head ; that Jesus Christ is eternally and essentially God, 
equal with the Father in wisdom, power, and glory ? " I do. 
T. Clapp." 

Do you believe in the distinct personality of the Holy Spi- 
rit ; his equality with the Father in wisdom, power, and glo- 
ry ; the necessity of his influence in the regeneration of hu- 
man hearts, in the production of faith and repentance, and 
every thing morally good in man ? "I do. T. Clapp." 

Do you believe that Unitarians, or persons holding the ne- 
gative of the above questions, however sincere their profes- 
sions, and however correct their moral deportment, should 
not be admitted to communion at the Lord's table by a mi- 
nister of the Presbyterian church ? "I do. T. Clapp." 

Do you believe that the punishment of the finally impeni- 
tent will be without end ? « I do. T. Clapp." 

Do you believe that God did from all eternity predestine a 
certain definite number of the human race to eternal life, such 
decree not being founded upon any foresight of their faith and 
good works, but upon his own mere good pleasure, securing 
for them, however, that faith and holiness necessary to pre- 
pare them for the presence of God ? "I do. T. Clapp." 

Although some difficulties exist in your mind with regard 
to the doctrine of the final perseverance of every one who 



128 



has been regenerated by the Holy Spirit of God ; do you yet 
upon the whole believe as held by our church ? "I do. T. 
Clapp." 

Do you believe that Creeds and Confessions of Faith are 
useful and necessary, as definite expressions of what in our 
view the Scriptures contain ? "I do. T. Clapp." 

Do you believe in the efficacy of intercessory prayer as 
usually held by the Presbyterian church ? " I do. T. Clapp." 

Resolved, that the report of the above Committee, toge- 
ther with the conference thereunto appended, be committed 
to the Committee of prosecution. 

Resolved, that in consideration of the letter of the Rev. 
Theodore Clapp of October 14th, 1831, and the conference 
held with him by the Committee on said letter, that the Com- 
mittee of prosecution in his case be a Committee of investiga- 
tion ; and that it shall be their duty to report suitable mea- 
sures in this case to the next meeting of the Presbytery. 

Resolved, that the Rev. John L. Montgomery be added to 
the Committee of investigation in the case of the Rev. Theo- 
dore Clapp. 

Institution of Learning, under the care of the Mississippi 
Presbytery, January 26, 1832. 
The Committee of investigation in the case of Mr. Clapp, 
presented their report, which was read and accepted, and is 
as follows : 

" The Committee of investigation, whose duty it was to re- 
port suitable measures in the case of the Rev. Theodore 
Clapp, beg leave to state, that in the prosecution of the duty 
assigned them, they have had some correspondence with the 
Rev. Mr. Clapp, which accompany this report ; and that they 
deem it advisable that they be permitted to continue their 
investigation until the next stated meeting of the Presbytery. 

GEORGE POTTS. Chairman." 

The further consideration of the above report was post- 
poned until to-morrow morning ; the following is the corres- 
pondence referred to in the above report, viz. 



129 



" New Orleans, December 19, I83L 
" To the Rev. Theodore Clapp. 

" Reverend and Dear Sir. — It is not necessary to remind 
you of the unsettled state in which the case wherein you are 
concerned was left at the close of the last meeting of the Pres- 
bytery of Mississippi, held in October. You will remember, 
that before the adoption of any definite measures it was thought 
necessary to appoint a Committee, whose duty it should be to 
make such investigations as the case requires, and report the 
result at their next meeting in January. In the discharge of 
this duty, the Committee of investigation deem it necessary to 
hold some correspondence with yourself. The object of that 
correspondence, briefly stated, is this ; to afford you an op- 
portunity of making acknowledgments or explanations (as the 
case may be) of certain charges involving your character as 
a Presbyterian minister. The Committee believe that you 
will not consider an apology necessary for the explicit man- 
ner in which they make this communication ; the purity, in- 
tegrity, peace, and dignity of the church to which we belong, 
are concerned in the adjustment of the case. 

" The written statements made by yourself at the last meet- 
ing of the Presbytery of your views of doctrine, will come 
under consideration of the Presbytery at the proper time. 
Even though they admit the general correctness of those 
views, they cannot be ignorant of the fact that you have ex- 
pressed yourself in your letter of March 5, 1830, in a way 
calculated to leave a most unfavourable impression of your 
doctrinal views, at least upon some of the points touched in 
that letter ; nor can they be ignorant of the fact, that common 
fame charges you with having held and preached, upon many 
occasions, statements at variance with those you expressed 
at the last meeting of the Presbytery. Nothing is more cer- 
tain than that very general impressions have been produced^ 
both among the friends and adversaries of our system of doc- 
trine and discipline, that you have departed from many, and 
some of them essential, doctrines and practices of our church. 
To settle the justice or injustice of those impressions has be- 
come an object of great importance both to yourself and the 



130 



Presbytery. The Committee beg leave to propose to you the 
following points for your attention. 

" 1. Have you ever expressed a disbelief of the doctrine of 
the Trinity of persons in the Godhead ? Will you say in what 
sense you once declared yourself to be a ' Duarian? and not 
a Trinitarian ? 

" 2. Have you ever questioned the endless duration of the 
misery of such as have lived and died in impenitence and un- 
belief? 

" 3. Have you always represented the atonement of the 
Lord Jesus Christ as an expiatory sacrifice ? 

" 4. Have you never called in question the indispensable ne- 
cessity of the Holy Spirit's special influences to the conver- 
sion of sinners ? 

" 5. Have you ever denied the depravity of human nature as 
derived from the connexion between Adam and his posterity ? 

" 6. Have you never sought so to widen the bonds of church- 
fellowship, as to embrace those who deny the proper divinity 
of the Lord Jesus Christ, nor declared your willingness to re- 
ceive such at the Lord's table ? 

" 7. Have you never so spoken of Creeds and Confessions 
as to throw contempt upon that Confession which you have 
received and adopted ? 

" 8. Have you not spoken in a harsh, disrespectful, and un- 
brotherly manner of the members of the Presbytery of Mis- 
sissippi ? 

" These are some of the particulars in regard to which a 
very general belief exists that you have departed, at times, 
from the faith and practice of the Gospel. If, dear Sir, in 
any of these respects you are conscious of having erred, an 
opportunity is now offered of making the necessary christian 
acknowledgments ; while, on the other hand, if the charges 
made against you be unjust, you can now offer the proper de- 
nial and exculpation. 

" Praying for a satisfactory settlement of every difficulty, 
and the restoration of confidence, we remain, 
Yours, in Gospel bonds, 

GEORGE POTTS, Chairman, 
in behalf of the Committee." 



131 



"New Orleans, December 20th, 1831. 
«' To the Rev. George Potts. 

" Reverend and Dear Sir.— -To answer your letter (which 
came to hand this moment, and the object of which is to open 
a correspondence by which I may have an opportunity of 
making acknowledgments or explanations with respect to cer- 
tain charges involving my character as a minister of the Pres- 
byterian church,) would be a mere repetition of the views 
which I presented to the Presbytery at their last meeting. 
Those views were placed in the hands of the Committee, of 
which I believe you are Chairman. To them I refer you for 
a complete exhibition of my sentiments on the doctrines of the 
Trinity, the duration of future misery, the atonement, conver- 
sion, sin, and the principles of christian fellowship. With 
respect to the last interrogatory which you propose, as to the 
manner in which I have spoken of the members of the Pres- 
bytery of Mississippi, I observe, that during the time of my 
supposed separation from your body, I frequently expressed 
the opinion that the measures adopted in my case were un- 
kind, and in violation of the discipline and government of the 
Presbyterian church. I do not think that I have ever said 
any thing against your christian character, that is, your body, 
or the purity of your motives. Before my separation from 
your body, and since my reunion, I have spoken of you, I be- 
lieve, uniformly in an affectionate, respectful, and christian 
style. But how have the members of the Presbytery spoken 
of me ? Have they said nothing harsh, disrespectful, and un- 
brotherly ? Let the investigation be extended to both sides. 
As to the report that I have preached sentiments at variance 
with those expressed at the last meeting of the Presbytery 
since my return to this city, it is utterly untrue. I should like 
to meet and confront any decent, responsible person, who 
dares utter such a calumny ; I should like to meet those who 
assail my doctrines before any competent judge of theology. 
Let those who distrust my theology, candour, and piety, quietly 
withdraw ; I want no controversy with them. I have friends 
enough to fill one church ; how long they will continue to be 
my friends is known to the omniscient mind only. If he will 

19 



132 



grant me his blessing, my faculties in future life may be use* 
fully employed. My only wish as to this world is, that I may 
be continued in it a few years longer, to devote my whole 
energies to the cause of pure Christianity. If the written 
statements which I made to the Presbytery do not answer 
your queries with sufficient explicitness, you will oblige me 
by saying so, and I will repeat. 

" I am, dear Sir, yours, in Gospel bonds, 

"T. CLAPP." 

"New Orleans, December 21, 1831. 
" To the Rev. Theodore Clapp. 

" Reverend and Dear Sir. — Acting in behalf of the Com- 
mittee (with whose views I am acquainted,) I have taken into 
consideration your reply to my communication of the 19th 
ult. That communication, if you will re-examine its contents, 
was not intended merely to draw from you ' a repetition of the 
■ views which you presented to the Presbytery at their last 
* meeting.' If such had been its object, I own it would have 
been superfluous. But there is reason to believe that you have 
incorrect impressions as to your present position in the Missis- 
sippi Presbytery. The case in which you are so materially 
concerned is far from being satisfactorily settled ; it remains 
to be seen whether we shall be obliged to comply with that 
part of the resolutions of the last Assembly which directs us 
to proceed to a trial. Now, however satisfactory may be the 
written statements of your present views given at the last 
meeting of the Presbytery, (so far as that statement goes,) a 
difficulty lies in the fact, that there is a general impression, 
and even direct evidence, that upon former occasions you 
have expressed yourself (whether intentionally or not) at va- 
riance with your present views ; I say evidence exists, and 
that too, independent of the testimony of those persons whom 
you believe to be your personal adversaries. May I request 
that you would recur to the queries proposed in my last com- 
munication, and observe the manner in which they are put. 
They do not ask what are your present views ; but whether, 
upon a review of the past, you can recall any real or alleged 



133 



discrepancies, which require either acknowledgment, denial, 
or exculpation. That you may not mistake my meaning, al- 
low me to refer you to the first of those queries, as affording 
an instance of a fact, the truth of which you have not denied, 
and 1 an acknowledgment or exculpation' of which is indispen- 
sable before this matter can be consistently adjusted by the 
Presbytery. The same may be said of some of the other 
points, especially the 6th and 7th. In regard to the 3d point 
an answer is requested, as there is nothing said in your late 
statement before the Presbytery as to the nature of the atone- 
ment, a vital point. The last of the queries, which you no- 
tice more at length, I beg you to review ; perhaps you have 
forgotten the instance, in which, both before and * during your 
supposed separation,' you have employed language which 
bordered upon opprobrium in speaking of the Presbytery and 
its decisions. If they have spoken of or treated you (as you 
intimate) with unchristian or contumelious harshness, you 
are aware that retaliation is not the course to which the Gos- 
pel points ; and without doubt, if convicted of having dealt by 
you or spoken of you in such a way, they will be ready to 
make ample christian reparation. 1 remain, dear Sir, 
" Very truly yours, in the bonds of the Gospel, 

" GEORGE POTTS, in behalf of the Committee." 

" New Orleans, December 1831. 
** Rev. George Potts, present. 

" Rev. and Dear Sir. — Your letter of the 21st inst. just 
came to hand. I think my impression is not incorrect as to 
my present position in the Mississippi Presbytery. The Gene- 
ral Assembly have put my name on the list of members com- 
posing the Mississippi Presbytery, and that in their printed 
minutes. As to the direct evidence that I have expressed my- 
self at variance with my present views on former occasions, 
(with the exception of the doctrine of the perseverance of the 
saints,) it is founded in ignorance, misconception, or preju- 
dice. I know the assertion has been made by several in this 
city ; I know I have been called false, contradictory, and 
fluctuating. If you and the Presbytery are not satisfied with. 



134 



my statements, it is your duty to investigate. Persons will tell 
you their impressions ; let them give you my words, I know 
the ground I occupy with regard to the first question. I 
have never said that I was a Duarian ; I have never denied 
the expiatory nature of the sacrifice of the Redeemer, if by 
expiation be meant his suffering as our substitute to procure 
for us exemption from the penalty of the law, pardon, and 
eternal life ; I have never denied the endless duration of fu- 
ture misery, meaning by misery the loss of holiness and all its 
advantages, and subjection to all the evils of sin ; (I do not 
believe in a material hell.) I have never called in question 
the necessity of the influence of the Holy Spirit in conver- 
sion ; I have never denied the depravity of human nature 
as derived from their connexion with Adam. In admitting 
persons to christian fellowship, I have never violated a rule 
of the Presbyterian church that I know of, before and since 
my supposed separation from the Mississippi Presbytery. I 
have said nothing about its members that in my judgment is 
unchristian. So, my dear Sir, I have answered all your que- 
ries. I know the calumnies that are propagated about my 
sentiments and character. My views for the last six years 
have undergone no change as to essential points, excepting 
perseverance. 

" Affectionately yours, in the Gospel. 

" THEODORE CLAPP." 

" New Orleans, December 23d, 1831. 
" Rev. Theodore Clapp. 

" Rev. and Dear Sir. — I have been somewhat doubtful 
whether, in the discharge of my duties as an agent of the 
Presbytery, it is necessary that I address you again. Upon 
reflection it seems to be my duty to make another effort to 
convince you that you are not fully aware of ! the ground you 
occupy.' Allow me then to repeat, that it is yet to be deter- 
mined whether w T e must comply with that part of the resolu- 
tions of the Assembly which intimates the propriety of a 
trial, a formal trial. Now, I have not disguised my wish to 
settle this matter, if possible, without the necessity of such a 



135 



trial. If, however, you will maintain such a stand as you have 
taken, I do not see how it can be averted. 

" You have replied to the queries put in my first communi- 
cation by positive denial. I speak candidly when I say I am 
convinced you have forgotten some things from your own 
pen, which at least appear to be inconsistent with a positive, 
unqualified denial, as to some of the particulars involved in 
those queries. To give you examples : in your long commu- 
nication addressed to myself before the last meeting of the 
Presbytery, you speak with pain of the instances in which 

* your language and manners were inconsistent with the laws 

* of christian civility.' How, my dear Sir, does this agree 
with the declaration of your last note, that you 1 have said no- 

* thing about the members of the Mississippi Presbytery that 
1 in your judgment was unchristian/ Besides, you cannot be 
aware of the universal testimony of those who have heard 
you speak on this subject, that you have spoken without a 
due regard to christian meekness, even supposing you were 
really injured. Now I beg you to say whether, in view of 
these things, you are unwilling to express your regret to the 
Presbytery as you have done to me individually. Again : you 
did not deny that you had once said you were a 4 Duarian f 
you owned it to myself ; Mr. Hazard testifies it ; and the only 
answer you made was, that you said so inconsiderately, and 
not with the intention to be understood seriously. Can you 
not, will you not, be willing to acknowledge this to the bre- 
thren as you did to me ? 

" Again : I have it in your own hand writing, that at a former 
period your views of christian fellowship were directly at va- 
riance with your statements to the last Presbytery. I will 
quote the language referred to, as you may not be in posses- 
sion of a copy of the letter in which it is contained ; it is as 
follows : 

" * I would not unchurch a person, or keep him from the 

* communion table, merely because he did not believe in the 

* doctrine of the Trinity, if he embraced the other essential 

* doctrines of the Gospel and led a christian life. I would as 
'soon be settled over a Unitarian church as any other; I 



136 



f would as soon exchange pulpits with a Unitarian clergyman 
* as any other, if I believed him to be a good man/ 

" Now, I am not about to dispute the abstract point con- 
tained in this passage, but I think you will at least admit of 
an apparent discrepancy between this passage and the answer 
given by you to a question proposed at the meeting of the 
Presbytery. You will probably recollect the question ; if 
not, and you should desire it, I will be happy to send you a 
copy. 

" In relation to my other queries I would only remark, that 
if I were in your situation I think I should be willing to say 
at least thus much, * that it was matter of great regret if I had 
s ever expressed myself so as to give any reason for miscon- 
4 struction of my sentiments upon important subjects.' I would 
be willing to say this, and would not insist, as you do, that the 
misconstruction was altogether the fault of others, and attri- 
butable altogether to their ignorance, misconception, and pre- 
judices. Would not this course comport with that humble 
sense of our own imperfection which each fellow-creature 
should preserve ? 

" I submit these remarks, my dear Sir, with the hope that 
you will feel their force ; and remain, very sincerely, 

" Your friend and well-wisher, 
" GEORGE POTTS, on behalf of the Committee." 

"New Orleans, 24th December, 1831. 
" To Rev. George Potts, present. 

" Rev. and Dear Sir. — Your letter of yesterday informs 
me that I am still, in your opinion, under a misapprehension 
as to my relation to the Mississippi Presbytery. How can 
you think so ? I understood that the Committee of investiga- 
tion was yet to report at the next meeting of the Presbytery, 
before the difference between me and them should be finally 
settled, not as to whether I am a member of your body, — that 
has been determined by the General Assembly, — but as to 
the truth of the rumours, so widely circulated, that my senti- 
ments have been, and are now, such as to render it improper 
for me to continue to be a minister of the Presbyterian church. 



137 



Sir, on this point there is no room for mistake. I was asto- 
nished that you should suppose that the acknowledgment in 
my letter to you last August that my language and manners 
had sometimes been not consistent with christian civility, 
should clash with the assertion that I do not remember of 
having spoken of the Presbytery in an unchristian manner 
before my supposed separation from them, or since. There 
is no inconsistency here ; for in my letter of August last I do 
not say when, or with respect to whom, I had violated the 
laws of christian politeness. But in a previous letter I re- 
marked, that during our supposed separation improper things 
had been uttered on both sides. I was surprised, too, that in 
your first letter to me since your last arrival here, you should 
speak of my alluding to unkind things spoken of me by the 
Presbytery as a reason why I should retaliate by uttering un- 
kind speeches concerning them. Now, Sir, I neither advo- 
cate nor act on the principle of revenge ; I simply express the 
opinion that the Presbytery was under the same obligations 
to acknowledge the improper language made use of by them, 
as I am to acknowledge my delinquencies in this deportment, 
(is it not so ?) or, in other words, I am willing to confess my 
sins of tongue, whatever they may be. Are you not willing 
to do the same ? Who is perfect ? What minister is there 
living, who has not at times violated christian politeness? 
Who is infallible ? Besides, what has this to do with the sub- 
ject ? The resolution of the General Assembly does not re- 
late to my speaking disrespectfully of your body, but to my 
holding, or having held, erroneous sentiments. There is no- 
thing which I have expressed to you that I am not willing to 
express to the Presbytery. With regard to being a Duarian, 
I have never said that I was one. If by the word is meant a 
denial of the divinity of the Holy Ghost, strictly speaking 
every Trinitarian is a Duarian, and a Unitarian too. We be- 
lieve in one, two, and three distinctions in the divine nature. 
I suppose Mr. Hazard was led to the suspicion that I denied 
the Holy Ghost, from the opinion which I expressed, that the 
Scriptural arguments for the divinity of the Son is more full 
than that relating to the third person of the Trinity. You say 



138 



that my remark was, that what I said to Hazard on this sub- 
ject was inconsiderately said. Now, 1 believe that I was 
speaking, not of my conversation with Hazard on this point 
only, but on other topics also, and that my remark was, that 
I was in the habit of talking to him in a facetious style. So I 
often do, when I think this is the best way to shew a person 
that he is too illiberal, or too hasty in giving his opinion on sub- 
jects which he has not thoroughly examined. As to my views 
of christian fellowship, they are the same now that they have 
been for years past. Abstractly speaking, I do not think it 
right to turn a person out of the church, who is acknowledged 
to be pious, for a mere error of judgment. Abstractly con- 
sidered, I do not think it wrong to exchange with a Unitarian, 
if we believe him to be a good man. But on these two sub- 
jects a Presbyterian minister is bound to follow the rules of 
his church ; because, generally speaking, the majority must be 
supposed to be in the right. These rules I believe I have al- 
ways obeyed. I submit to the laws of the community to 
which I belong, yet I do not think these laws perfect in every 
respect. Indeed, on this subject I only say what Dr. Bucher 
and Dr. Woods say, — that among Unitarians there are some 
pious persons, and that all genuine christians have a right to 
the Lord's table. Now, Sir, it cannot be necessary for us to 
be more strict lawed here than they are in New- York, Bos- 
ton, and Philadelphia. 

" I have no hesitation in saying, that it is matter of great 
regret if I have ever expressed myself so as to give any just 
reason of misconstruction of my sentiments on important sub- 
jects. That I have done this sometimes in years gone by is 
probable. In my last letter I was speaking of alleged contra- 
diction to my written statements to the Presbytery, made since 
C vour ~i 

< } * return. It is my deliberate opinion that such al- 

l or my $ J r 

legations are founded in ignorance, misconception, and preju- 
dice. I do not wish to varnish over my failings. I wish you 
could see my heart ; you would behold, in that case, many 



* Torn by the wafer. 



139 



abominations, but entire sincerity and candour in my declara- 
tions to the Presbytery. 

" I conceive the question stated to me last Presbytery, as to 
church communion, had reference simply to the duty of the 
Presbyterian ministers on this subject ; I believe, in giving an 
answer, it was so considered by me. 

" In my first letter to you last summer, after having heard 
of the decision of the General Assembly, I stated to you that 
I regretted ever having used harsh, disrespectful, or unchris- 
tian language towards any member of the Presbytery ; I think 
I so expressed myself. Is not this enough ? I may be mis- 
taken ; if I made not the declaration then, I make it now. 
But permit me to remind you of the manner in which some 
members of the Presbytery have spoken of me. Is there not 
as much to forget and forgive on one side as the other ? 

" Affectionately and respectfully yours, 

"T.*CLAPP." 

" New Orleans, December 24, 1831. 
" Rev. Theodore Clapp. 

•* Rev. and Dear Sir. — Without passing an opinion upon 
the character of the explanations contained in yours of this 
date, I will now close this correspondence upon the part of 
the Committee. The results of the correspondence shall be 
laid before the Presbytery at its next meeting. Should you, 
upon a re-examination of the topics embraced in our late com- 
munications, wish any farther conference with the Committee, 
you will be pleased to address the Chairman at Natchez, be- 
tween this and the 20th January next. 

" I cannot forbear saying that I regret to learn that there 
is an ambiguity in the question proposed to you at the Presby- 
tery in regard to church-fellowship, and that you consider it 
confined to Presbyterian ministers as such. Your affirmative 
answer to that question, if 1 understand you now, does not 
convey your opinion as to the impropriety of the admission 
into church communion of those who deny the proper divinity 
and expiatory sacrifice of the Lord our Redeemer and rob 
him of his glory. This inconsistency between your abstract 

20 



140 



opinion and your practices, must necessarily be productive of 
serious evil, and I have no doubt will be thought so by the 
Presbytery. 

" In addition I would only say, that my reason for suppos- 
ing that you misunderstood your present position in the Mis- 
sissippi Presbytery is, that you had, both in conversation and 
writing, ? represented the difficulties between yourself and the 
Presbytery as settled this, I think, is not the case. In a 
matter of so much moment to yourself, you will, of course, 
wish to be present at the final decision as to the plan to be 
pursued ; as you are aware the intermediate meeting of the 
Presbytery will be held on the fourth Wednesday of January 
next. 

" With sincere wishes for your temporal and eternal wel- 
fare, I am truly yours in the Gospel, 

" G. POTTS." 

Resolved, that in view of the important subject suggested 
by the report just read, we spend a season in special prayer. 

1832. — January %7th. The report of the Committee of in- 
vestigation was considered. Inasmuch as the result of the cor- 
respondence held by the Committee of investigation with Mr. 
Clapp is not satisfactory to the Presbytery, Resolved, that 
the recommendation of the Committee be adopted, and that 
the Committee be continued until the next stated meeting of 
the Presbytery. 

Carmel Church, . 
Friday, April 6th, 1832, 8 o'clock, A. M. 
The Committee of investigation in the case of the Rev. 
Theodore Clapp, submitted a report, which was accepted, 
and, after some amendments, recommitted to the same Com- 
mittee. 

The Committee of investigation in the case of the Rev. 
Theodore Clapp presented their report, which was accepted, 
and, after some amendment, adopted, and is as follows : viz. 



141 



The Committee of investigation appointed in the case of 
the Rev. Theodore Clapp, submit the following report : 

" It is their opinion, that, according to the suggestion of the 
General Assembly, this Presbytery has sufficient reasons to 
proceed to try him in relation to errors in doctrine. They 
moreover learn, that reports unfavourable to the moral cha- 
racter of the Rev. Theodore Clapp have been so widely cir- 
culated to his injury, and also to that of the cause of religion 
among us, as imperiously to demand a Committee of prosecu- 
tion to conduct the charges made against him, both on doc- 
trine and deportment. 

" Justice to him and the church of Christ, we think, demand 
that he should be either acquitted or condemned in our eccle- 
siastical court with the least possible delay. They are pre- 
pared to furnish this Committee, when appointed, with all the 
information on the subject which they have obtained. 

(Signed) "GEORGE POTTS, } e 

« JOHN H. VANCOURT, I Committee of 
« JOHN U MONTGOMERY, ) investigation." 

«* April 5th, 1832." 



At the request of the Rev. Theodore Clapp the following 
letters were read ; the first from the Rev. George Potts, and 
the second from the Rev. Theodore Clapp ; viz. 

" Natchez, January 7, 1832. 

« To the Rev. T. Clapp. 

" Rev. and Dear Sir. — I promised to write as a friend as 
soon as I should return home, and tell you honestly what I 
have thought, and still think, of your past course and present 
position. As one of the members of that judicatory to which 
you are amenable, I am aware that I must exercise great deli- 
cacy, both in- the formation and expression of opinions in a 
cause which may finally come before us for trial. You will 
have observed, long since, that in our personal interviews I 
have been in a great measure a listener. I hope you have not 
construed my silence into a satisfaction with all your aver- 
ments and explanations. With my views you were acquaint- 



142 



ed from my letters, and it was never my intention to debate 
where I am persuaded debate would have answered no pur- 
pose. Since my return from New Orleans I have been se- 
riously reviewing the occurrences of the last six or seven years, 
and, as might have been expected, painful reflections prepon- 
derate. Our intercourse has been chiefly Presbyterial, and, 
as you know, causes have been for a long time operating 
which have made that intercourse discordant. The interest 
I have felt in you as a man and a friend, has been in a great 
degree absorbed by the painful interest excited by your move- 
ments as a Presbyterian minister. You will, no doubt, think 
it my own fault that the harmony which formerly existed 
should have been interrupted. You will think that I have lis- 
tened to slanderous reports about you, that 1 have acted under 
the influence of narrow sectarian feelings ; that I have not 
appreciated the difficulties of your situation, nor the peculiari- 
ties of your mind and manners. Perhaps you have thought, 
that, like all others who have crossed your path, I too have 
been influenced by personal motives. But I feel that I am 
claiming no more than my due when I assert, that none of the 
causes above enumerated, nor all of them put together, have 
created the distrust with which for some time past I have re- 
garded you. You will bear with me for speaking plainly; 
that distrust has not been yet removed, and I feel it to be due 
to myself to detail some of the sources of it, at the same time 
distinctly declaring, that I know of few circumstances that 
would give me greater pleasure than to be able, from the heart, 
to greet you as a copresbyter in our church. I can conceive 
of nothing more painful than to be forced, by stress of circum- 
stances, even to suspect the ingenuousness of one whom you 
have called your friend. 1 Charity,' indeed, ' thinketh no evil, 
and believeth all things ;' but it is evident that these general 
expressions must have some limitation. Charity is not a dotard ; 
it does not require us to think that to be right which we have 
strong reasons to think wrong. The application of these re- 
marks is evident. I believed you had changed your views on 
some doctrinal and practical peculiarities of our church ; that 
you had left your Presbytery in ignorance of the full extent 



143 



that change ; that in some points you had publicly impugned 
the faith of our church, (witness perseverance, others might 
be specified ;) and, believing all this upon grounds I shall no- 
tice presently, I ask if the conclusion was not inevitable 1 I 
think you will admit, that if I had evidence to believe that 
you had rejected some important doctrinal and practical pe- 
culiarities of the Presbyterian church (whose Confession of 
Faith you had received,) for some time before you took any 
official steps to change your ecclesiastical relation, I was jus- 
tified in my conviction of disingenuousness. This is the light 
in which I was forced by irresistible reasons to regard you. 
It needs not to disguise the real fact, and therefore I speak 
thus plainly. I say irresistible reasons ; for could they have 
been resisted or explained away, had I not every motive to 
wish they might be ? Had I not every reason to wish that a 
friend, a talented and influential friend, should continue a friend 
and co-worker in the same part of the church of Christ ? Had 
not my brethren the same reasons ? 

" If, then, any fault be imputable, it is my having hastily, 
and upon insufficient grounds, taken up my opinion that you 
had changed your views, and had preached and spoken in op- 
position to the well-understood doctrines and practices of the 
church, before you had made any declaration of your views 
to the Presbytery. Pray observe, I do not, I never did, 
complain that you had altered your opinions ; but that after 
such change of opinions, you had failed to seek promptly a 
dissolution with a church whose opinions you had abandoned. 
With the views of doctrine and practice you expressed at the 
last Presbytery, (so for as they go, and taking the sense that 
I then supposed you intended,) I am satisfied. But you say 
these have always been your views, with the one exception, 
of perseverance ; if so, you have been a most unfortunate man 
in some way. I shall now take the liberty of giving you the 
reasons why I think you have not been the consistent advo- 
cate of these views. I shall confine myself to the tenor of our 
own correspondence. 

" Our correspondence up to May of 1829, was to me plea- 
sant and profitable in the main. About that period I learned 



144 



from intelligent friends and strangers, some of them your ad- 
mirers, that it was a very general impression, both of your ad- 
vocates and adversaries, that you were no Presbyterian in 
doctrine. Flying rumours of this sort I had often heard, but 
I shut my ears against them. About this time also, you first 
informed me of your intention to publish, and, among others, 
made this remark, ' (May 21, 1829,) either I am blind, or some 
' who have lived before me have strangely misunderstood 

* some parts of the Bible/ You do not specify ; but in your 
future letters, upon three or four occasions, you confine your 
observations to the obnoxious point of predestination ; and, 
although you speak chiefly of the predestination of evil, yet 
your reasoning bears equally hard upon the predestination of 
good actions. Divers and contemptuous remarks about Creeds 
were scattered through your epistles. When I urged that you 
had once signed the chapter on decrees, your reply was, that 
&ny Arminian could have signed it. Here our correspond- 
ence terminated for a time, as I then went to Synod upon the 
business of your church. I would here remark, that your 
correspondence at this time betrayed marks of a very heated 
mind. 

" Upon my return from Synod, I found that the reports of 
your antipresbyterian preaching were increasing in frequency, 
and that they came from competent judges ; let me specify 
the lamented Christmas for one. Besides your alleged repu- 
diation of the Presbyterian views of election and its collateral 
doctrines, I had heard that you denied the Scripture doctrine 
of the saints' perseverance, but in your letters you said no- 
thing of it. I asked you at last the direct question, and you 
confirmed the rumour. Weigh this fact if you please. But 
more than this, (I am now giving you the grounds upon which 
I formed my belief that you had become an Arminian,) in 
your letter of March 5th, you thus notice my expressions of 
sorrow contained in a letter of February 26th :-— * you say my 

* departure from the doctrines of the Presbyterian church gives 

* you pain. This circumstance is to me inexplicable upon the 
' supposition of your sincerity, for you believe that God has 

* foreordained whatsoever comes to pass, so that nothing could 



145 



s happen otherwise than it does ; and whatsoever happens is 
4 agreeable to God's purpose and essential to God's glory! 
Is this the language of one who only denied the foreordination 
of evil ? Is it not the stereotype objection of all Arminians 
to the very doctrine you lately signed at the Presbytery 1 Does 
this indicate no change of views, especially when you add 
to this a similar sneer in the very same epistle ? In speaking 
of the danger to which an honest independent inquirer (such 
as yourself) exposes himself, you say, 4 the whole weight of 
* that community called elect, is made to press upon him as 
1 they used to press witches to death in old times.' Sir, I 
made no reply to those sneers ; I considered them beneath 
reply. But I understood them as any man would understand 
them ; there was only one application of which they were ca- 
pable, and if I had hitherto wanted any thing to convince me 
that there could be no harmony between you and those with 
whom you had voluntarily joined yourself, I was now satisfied. 
The letter containing the above and much kindred language, 
contained also your request for dismission. I thought it was 
time for such an application. I might here add, that every 
representation you made to me about this time of your views 
of election, (which you always said you believed,) was couch- 
ed in decidedly Arminian language. Had you been a tyro, 
or had there been no corroborating suspicions of your sound- 
ness upon collateral points, I might have passed it by unno- 
ticed. But you must be aware I was sure of the necessity 
(under such circumstances as ours) of theological accuracy 
when giving a definition upon so disputed a point. The amount 
of all your definitions is, that God elected those who believed 
in Christ. So every Arminian holds ; and, taking every thing 
into view, I feel now justified in having concluded that you 
had embraced the Arminian view of an election founded upon 
a foreseen faith and good works. 

" Viewing these facts in connexion ; — your language to my- 
self; the corroborating reports from all quarters; your ridi- 
cule of Calvinists, designated by the elegant name of 1 five 
pointers ;' your frequent introduction of Calvin and Servitus, 
(a favourite theme with all antipresbyterians ;) — I leave it to 



146 



any unprejudiced mind to determine whether I had not good 
reason to interpret your letter of March 5th, (to Presbytery,) 
as the production of an Arminian. And yet you had been 
preaching these views for some time before your official com- 
munication to the Presbytery. 

" Before I leave these points, allow me to revert to the fact, 
(which I pray you to weigh well,) that the reports of your va- 
riance from the well-known Creed of the church to which you 
nominally belonged, proceeded not from your personal ene- 
mies, (as you deem them,) but from admirers, who gave you 
the mead of praise for what they thought the independence 
and liberality of your sentiments. 

" Fully convinced, therefore, that you had repudiated dis- 
tinguishing tenets of the Presbyterian church, I approved, and 
still approve, of the mode in which the Presbytery severed the 
tie which connected you with them. I might perhaps state, 
that the proceedings of the Presbytery have received the ap- 
probation of a man, who, above all other men in our church, 
understands the construction and spirit of our constitution ; and 
that a motive which governed many of the last Assembly in 
removing you, was a conviction that we had dealt too lightly, 
and that you should be tried and condemned. This convic- 
tion, I know, was confirmed by the tenor and language of Mr. 
Maybin's complaint, which, when it was read, produced more 
unfavourable impressions of your orthodoxy than had before 
existed. That this was the fact is also obvious from the lan- 
guage of the Assembly's resolutions. 

" I am thus brought to the period of your separation from 
us. After that separation, other facts came to my knowledge 
which increased my distrust ; I allude to your speculations 
about the personality of the Holy Spirit, which were confirm- 
ed by Mr. Hazard's testimony, and since by Mr. Maybin's. 
Mr. H's. testimony is direct and unequivocal. I have fre- 
quently asked him whether he was not mistaken, and he has 
always answered that he could not be. Take this in connex- 
ion with your views of fellowship with Unitarians ; I need not 
prove that you have advocated the propriety of their admis- 
sion. You have admitted that you believe in the abstract 



147 



propriety of their admission to the Lord's table, and even of 
an exchange of pulpits ; and that the questions signed at the 
Presbytery were confined to the duty of Presbyterian ministers. 
Testimony upon this point is needless. Unquestionable tes- 
timony could be produced to shew, that, practically as well as 
abstractly, you have been in this respect a latitudinarian. I 
can testify too, that the time was when even your abstract 
opinions (much less your practice) was not, as it is now, in fa- 
vour of admitting Unitarian communicants or exchanging 
with Unitarian preachers ; and yet you declare that your opi- 
nions have undergone no change for the last five or six years. 
On the questions at issue, excepting perseverance, I will add 
that no member of the Presbytery could have suspected that 
there was a distinction made by you between the practice of 
a Presbyterian minister and his opinions upon so important a 
point ; if they had, be assured they would have been more 
explicit. You knew their views, and that the object of the 
question proposed was to ascertain your accordance or dis- 
cordance with those views. 

" But I have not time to enlarge. The above opinions of 
yours were not known at the time of separation. You are 
sent back for trial ; they now become subjects of investiga- 
tion. How we shall deal with them is the question. 

" Reflections, painful reflections, crowd upon me ; I cannot 
give them utterance. The result of my investigation is still 
undefined. May God make clear my path of duty. 

" I must candidly state my preponderating impression that 
your correspondence with the Committee of investigation will 
not prove satisfactory. The Great Omniscient knows that 
my mind is desirous of such a direction as will secure the in- 
terests of the truth. My most charitable construction of past 
affairs is just this, — I do think that the time was when you 
were (perhaps unconsciously) verging nearer and nearer to- 
wards the confines of serious error ; that you were arrested 
in your progress and brought back ; and that your difficulties 
now arise from the positive denial on your part that you have 
ever expressed opinions different from those you expressed 
w T hen at the Presbytery in writing. Look back, my dear Sir, 

21 



148 



and if you admit the possibility that this may be the case, 1 
pray you to make a free and candid acknowledgment, as the 
only means of restoration to the confidence of the church. 
You know not all that your friends say of you ; you are not 
in a situation to know. I am firmly convinced, that if the 
queries signed by you at Port Gibson were spread before the 
public in New Orleans, universal astonishment would be the 
consequence. Take this as the result of deliberate examina- 
tion on my part. 

" I close by advising your attendance at the next meeting 
of the Presbytery, or such a reply to these suggestions (the 
reply directed to the Committee of investigation) as may su- 
persede the necessity of your personal attendance. 

" With sincere wishes that you may be directed of God, I 
remain truly your friend, 

"GEORGE POTTS. 
" P. S. Dr. Merrill informs me that you believe that the 
prelatical was the primitive form of the Christian church. Is 
this so ? I am persuaded there must be some mistake, other- 
wise you would scarcely wish to be connected with any 
other than an Episcopal body." 

" February Ytth, 1832. New Orleans. 
" To Rev. George Potts, Natchez. 

" Rev. and Dear Sir. — Your letter of the 7th ult. has 
been received, read, and its contents duly perpended. I am 
really obliged to you for telling me precisely what you think 
of my past course and present position with respect to the 
Presbyterian church ; but I am sorry that you still suspect 
my ingenuousness, because I am certain that I have not been 
disingenuous ; and feel confident that not one fact, argument, 
or circumstance, can be substantiated to convict me of want 
of candour and sincerity. You have been so kind as to dis- 
close your opinions freely as to my sentiments and character, 
(for 1 regard it as an act of kindness.) I hope you will cheer- 
fully concede to me the same liberty which you have taken. 
You say that my disingenuousness consists, not in having al- 
tered my opinions* but in having continued my connexion 



149 



with the Presbytery after the change had taken place. The 
meaning of disingenuousness is thus stated by Webster,™ Un- 
fairness, want of candour, low craft. Now, I inquire what 
change of opinion required my separation from the Presby- 
tery before I asked for a dismission ? This took place two 
years ago come March next. The two preceding years I 
had unbosomed myself to you on the subject of my theolo- 
gical views ; 1 hope you have preserved my letters, copies 
of them are not in my possession ; but I do possess numerous 
manuscripts written by me during that period, which I have 
attentively examined. From them I am certain that the only 
doctrines I had doubted or denied prior to March, 1830, with 
the exception of the perseverance of the saints, are the fol- 
lowing, — unconditional election and reprobation, literal im- 
putation of Adam's sin, limited atonement, physical inability, 
inevitable grace, or the mere passivity of the soul in conver- 
sion. Will you say that the rejection of these doctrines 
required my immediate and voluntary withdrawal from 
the church? Then the majority of Presbyterian ministers 
should withdraw ; for, on the above special points, they think 
as I do. Will you take the ground that it is disingenuous for 
me to continue in the Presbyterian church when my views 
coincide with those of a majority of its ministers? If I dif- 
fered from the majority in one jot or tittle, it was about the 
perseverance of the saints. Let us look at the truth on this 
subject. I think, from memory as well as from my papers, 
that a doubt never entered my mind concerning the truth of 
the doctrine of perseverance till the summer of 1829. From 
this time till the winter of 1830 I was occasionally occupied 
in examining the Scriptural testimony on the subject ; it was 
not until the last of January or the beginning of February, 
1830, that I deliberately formed or publicly expressed what 
you deem antipresbyterian views on perseverance. About 
one month after this I sought to be dismissed from the Pres- 
bytery, and that as soon as I learned that you and other 
brethren considered my change of views incompatible with a 
farther connexion with it. This I can prove from your let- 
ters. Was there any disingenuousness here 1 Do you think 



lf)0 

you could convince any candid, unprejudiced person that the 
above course was unfair, uncandid, or insincere. Besides, 
remember that I avowed even then my belief of the perseve- 
rance of the saints, but affirmed that it could not be proved 
from Scripture ; and also, that although all once truly con- 
verted will finally reach heaven, yet such do sometimes lose 
their religion in this life. But I contended that they did not 
lose their religion finally and forever. Such were the opinions I 
once advocated in the pulpit, and only once, and that about a 
month before my request to be dismissed. But if I held the 
same opinion now, it would not, as I think, constitute a valid, 
insuperable objection to my holding a standing in the Pres- 
byterian church. Thus believing that I could lawfully con- 
tinue my connexion with the Presbyterian church with the 
sentiments which J then avowed, I should not be open to the 
charge of unfairness had I never requested dismission from 
your body. What there is disingenuous in expressing one's 
opinion on the meaning of Holy Writ, when one seriously be- 
lieves such an expression is not at variance with any obliga- 
tions that he is under to the society of which he is a member, 
I acknowledge myself unable to see. I do not believe, Sir, 
there is a minister in the United States more unobnoxious to 
the charge of having acted disingenuously than the very 
humble individual who now addresses you. If you doubt, let 
the subject be scrutinized ; let me have an opportunity to 
plead my cause, and spread my defence on the records of the 
Presbytery. I care not so much about my opponents in this 
place, as about my character in the estimation of the Presby- 
terian church generally. If I have been false, fluctuating, 
contradictory, and disingenuous, let it be made to appear, let 
it be proved, and let me be dealt with accordingly. I thought 
this was the very object of the resolution of the General As- 
sembly, — that I might have an hearing, an opportunity to make 
my defence. I do not want a formal trial, but I want a tho- 
rough overhauling of this whole business. If I have done 
wrong, for the wrong I have done I am ready to make all 
reasonable concessions ; if I have been injured, let it be 
shown and let me be acquitted. I should like to meet all the 



1-01 



witnesses that can be mustered in this city, whether friendsr 
or foes ; I have the means of eliciting and establishing truth, 
and all I want is that the truth may prevail. You refer to* 
my correspondence as furnishing evidence of having held in- 
correct views as to predestination. Sir, I have never denied 
that God foreordained all that is good, and also that men 
should be made capable of evil, foreseeing that they would do 
evil, and some of them perish everlastingly. All that I have 
ever contended for is this, that it is censurable to say that 
God determines by an irresistible decree those evil actions 
which his law forbids ; that the nature of God is such that he 
must will holy actions, and only holy actions ; yet for reasons 
infinitely wise and holy, he determined to give men the power 
of sinning, knowing beforehand that they would exercise it. 
I say now that any Arminian can subscribe to the chapter on 
decrees in the Confession of Faith with an undefiled con- 
science. But I mean, I always have meant, by * Arminian- 
ism,' the doctrines of Arminius himself ; as I mean by Cal- 
vinism, the doctrines found in Calvin's own works. Mr. 
Stewart says in the Biblical Repertory, No. II. page 304, 

* that Arminius, to use the language of the present times, was 

* merely a moderate Calvinist, and moderate too in a very li- 
' mited degree ; for on most points he seems to have been alto- 
'gether as strenuous as Calvin himself.' The Biblical Reper- 
tory admits that there is common ground on which Armini- 
ans and Calvinists may meet with respect to Election. As 
to creeds, all that I have ever said, I say now, — that when re- 
garded as the opinions of fallible men, they are of great utility ; 
but when viewed as perfect, as invested with the attribute of 
infallibility and inspiration, they may cause the Bible to be 
undervalued and thrown into the back ground. What I said 
about your regretting my departure from Presbyterianism, is 
perfectly consistent with all that I have ever denied on the 
subject of Election, viz. the foreordination of evil. My re- 
mark * that the whole weight of the community called elect 
1 is made to press upon the bold inquirer after Bible truth,' 
(by whom you suppose I meant myself ; a very charitable 
supposition !) you call a sneer. What a misnomer ! That it 



152 



is so, I think on reflection you must see. I meant by elect, the 
Old School Calvinists ; they are a minority in the Presbyte- 
rian church. I do really think (though I call not in question 
their sincerity) that their influence is opposed to the exegeti- 
cal school. May I not say so ? Is this contemptuous con- 
duct ? Montes parturiunt, ridiculus mus nascitur. Besides, 
the sneer was beneath your notice then ; what has so enno- 
bled it, that you deign to give it a passing glance now ? You 
wish me to notice the fact that my admirers applaud me for 
having renounced Presbyterianism ; are you sure that my ad- 
mirers know precisely what Presbyterianism is ? Multitudes, 
you are aware, who are well informed on other subjects, do 
not understand theological distinctions. Many of my hear- 
ers know nothing of the difference between the New and Old 
School. When, therefore, they have heard me abjure the 
doctrines stated on the first page of my letter, they thought, 
perhaps, that I was opposing the church to which I belonged, 
though on such occasions I have always explicitly affirmed 
that my views were those of a majority of the Presbyterian 
ministers in the United States. I believe they always have 
been so with the exception above made ; I believe they are 
now. With regard to the General Assembly, nothing would 
delight me more than to have an opportunity to show them 
how extensively I have been traduced and injured. I do not 
know what this business has to do with Mr. Maybin's senti- 
ments ; he is of age, let him answer for himself ; the protest 
was entirely his own production. I believe I did not read it 
till after the decision of the General Assembly. With regard 
to my denying the personality of the Holy Spirit, I have al- 
ways denied it ; I denied it in the very first sermon on the 
Trinity that I preached in this place nine years ago. You 
deny it in the same sense that I do, and so does every con- 
sistent Trinitarian in the land. A person, literally means an 
agent, to whom are applicable the pronouns I, thou, he, or it. 
Now, I do not believe that there are three separate agents in 
the Godhead, in the common acceptation of the term agent ; 
this is Tritheism. I believe in God the Father, the Son, and 
the Holy Spirit. In my prayers I address God the Father, 



153 



God the Son, God the Holy Ghost. I believe, as divine, they 
are alike and equal; that, in some respects unrevealed to us, they 
differ. The word person is employed to denote this unknown 
difference, this unrevealed something, this mystery of the mode 
of the divine existence not to be disclosed in time, perhaps 
not in eternity. Is there heresy in the above ? If Dr. Green 
be correct, to my mind there is nothing mysterious in the doc- 
trine of the Trinity. Look at his works on the Catechism, 
page 125. where he defines person to be an agent, and then 
affirms that there are three in the Godhead. I do think the 
venerable Doctor has fallen into the error (unconsciously) of 
Tritheism ; nor do I believe there is any way of avoiding, on 
the one hand Tritheism, on the other Sabellianism, but by 
the mode of exhibiting the Trinity adopted by Professor 
Stewart, the New-England clergy generally, and adopted by 
your humble servant. I have sometimes smiled at the stress 
you seem to lay on Mr. Hazard's testimony. Sir, Mr. Hazard, 
whom I hope to be a good man, was never my confidant for 
a moment ; to him I have disclosed nothing but what I wish- 
ed to be published ; and I might add, that I have, on the solemn 
theme above-mentioned, no views which I wished to conceal. 
I cannot but wonder at the fuss which has been made about 
my views of fellowship with Unitarians. I do fondly believe 
and hope that I am more charitable towards the Unitarians 
and other denominations than I was some years ago. I pray 
God to forgive my former uncharitableness ; I look back up- 
on it with shame, and I hope penitence. But at the same 
time I think my attachment to orthodox tenets (I mean what 
you call orthodox tenets,) has been strengthened. Sir, for the 
last twenty years I have never doubted but that there were 
some pious persons among the Unitarians ; so I think. I have 
never known but one Unitarian come to our communion un- 
der the invitation given to strangers, viz. a Mr. Vose, of this 
city. He has not communed for several years. Two others, 
a Mr. Richardson and Mrs. Gurncy, communed with us once 
only. The former I know to be a Universalist ; he had spent 
several winters in this city, but had never offered to commune 
with us. I was surprised to see him come forward, thougli I 



154 



know nothing against his character. Mrs. Gurncy is a Uni- 
versalist ; so her most intimate friends here affirm. But be 
pleased to notice, that both of these last-mentioned persons 
believed at the time that we were independent ; that the 
church, as well as myself, was separated from the Presbytery. 
They had heard of my dismission. Mr. Richardson told me 
himself that it was under this impression that he came forward. 
Mrs. Gurncy made a similar remark to Mrs. Maybin, and re- 
gretted the mistake, as she feared it might cause difficulty in 
the church. Look at these simple facts ; consider the noise, 
the clamour they have called forth. Montes parturiunt, nasci- 
tur ridiculus mus. You have, Sir, all my communications to 
the Presbytery since 1826 ; you have my letters to yourself ; 
you have the liberty of taking the testimony of those who have 
attended regularly on my preaching ; to them I appeal. If 
there has been any change as to any material point, except 
perseverance, during all this time, it is to me unknown ; I am 
not conscious of it. If on any other point I have essentially 
deviated, you will greatly oblige me by pointing it out. I do 
assure you, that if I know any thing of my own heart, I have 
not a wish to cover or to explain away any error of doctrine 
that I may have embraced. The winter of 1830 was one of 
great excitement with us. I could name, if I thought proper, 
the persons by whom, at that time, the suspicions were set 
afloat as to my essential orthodoxy, which I fear have had an 
undue influence on the minds of some of my brethren in the 
ministry. At first I only laughed at them ; I considered them 
too absurd and ridiculous to merit a serious notice. The ef- 
forts of my enemies were unremitted and ingenious. A lady 
of my society, of whose sincerity and candour all who know 
her have an high opinion, told me that she was so much alarm- 
ed during that period, by the incessant talk about my heresy, 
that she could listen to my preaching only with a critical spi- 
rit, Nearly the whole church was in the same predicament 
the last year and this. I have repeated every sermon that I 
preached in 1830, except the one on perseverance, I mean 
during the two last years ; this winter I have preached but 
two or three of them. Nor have I varied them, as I think, in 



155 



any essential point. Now the sermons are pronounced ortho- 
dox ; then they were alarmingly heterodox. Popular impres- 
sions are contagious ; I consider the disaffection towards me 
as much a disease as the yellow fever. It is a very inflamma- 
tory disease ; a moral ophthalmy, preventing the subject of it 
from taking a clear, discriminating, and unprejudiced view of 
things. During the time that this disease was at its height, 
various predictions were uttered. Some dozen or more really 
turned prophets. One foretold that in a few months I was 
coming out a Universalist ; another, that I should shortly run 
up the Unitarian colours ; a third, that my plan was to attach 
myself to the Episcopalians. None of these prophecies have 
been verified. How are those who uttered them with so 
much assurance to save their reputation for sagacity in this 
quandary ? The easiest way is to persuade their votaries that 
your humble servant, from fright, better judgment, an awak- 
ened conscience, or some other cause, abandoned his schemes 
before they had advanced to maturity. All my projects are 
lost like water spilled on the ground, — like the abortion of a 
woman that never saw the sun, (Bible metaphor ;) see Psalm 
lviii. 8. O, I have changed my views ; I have changed my 
ground. Easily said : more easily said than proved. I throw 
out perseverance ; on no other point have I materially altered 
my views. Upon the entire accuracy of the statement I stake 
my character, my respectability, my earthly all. Even Donan, 
I am told, goes round telling the church members that at the 
Presbytery I declared myself a Calvinist. Nothing can be 
more unfair than such a naked, unqualified assertion. Let 
Donan define Calvinism, and then the people here would not 
be deceived. All the Calvinism that I ever disclaimed is un- 
conditional election and reprobation ; imputation of Adam's 
sin ; limited atonement ; physical inability and passivity. Did 
I admit any of these at the Presbytery ? Did I not deny them 
all ? Nothing can be more untrue than the assertion that I 
declared my belief, at the last meeting of the Presbytery, in 
what I believe to be the doctrines of Calvinism. What I sub- 
scribed to is in my opinion Arminianism ; you may call it Cal- 
vinism or any thing else you please. The question is, how I 

22 



156 



regarded it. The question is not about words, but things ; 
not about shadows, but realities. I am prepared to substan- 
tiate the point, that the interrogatories to which I subscribed 
at Port Gibson contain nothing repugnant to the Confession 
of Faith handed in by myself ; nothing repugnant to the uni- 
form tenor of my preaching during the whole of my settlement 
in this place. Many persons do not, in listening to a sermon, 
give it their undivided, uniform sustained attention. Many 
have taken up the impression that my denial of unconditional 
election and reprobation amounts to entire scepticism on the 
subject of the decrees. A great mistake. I believe that all 
God's acts are in entire harmony with his purposes. That he 
will save finally just as many as he originally intended to save, 
cannot be doubted. I further believe that God will save as 
many as he can save, and that all will not be saved because 
their salvation is an impossibility ; I mean a moral impossibi- 
lity, not physical. You may inquire, why God could not as 
easily save all as a part ? I answer that I do not know, Re- 
velation does not explain the reason ; but it seems to me that 
the perfections of the Deity demand that he should save as 
many as possible, as the character of a pious man requires 
that he should do as much good as possible, and no evil. The 
fact simply that God will not save all, shows that there is some 
insuperable obstacle in the way. To me it is shocking, to say 
that God sends a part of mankind to hell when he might with 
perfect ease, and without encroaching on or sullying his per- 
fections, have qualified them for Heaven. If sin and misery 
are an evil, must not God do all he can to destroy them ? I 
am sorry that I did not see you at Rodney. I shall be at the 
next meeting of the Presbytery, Deo volente. You think 
the nature of the interrogatories I subscribed to at Port Gib- 
son would astonish the people here if they should see them : 
rest assured, dear Sir, that you are entirely mistaken ; all 
understand here that I have denied nothing about election, but 
reprobation ; that I deny alike in my Confession of Faith and 
in the interrogatories. Papers have been handed round here 
purporting to be the interrogatories I signed at Port Gibson ; 
show the whole that has passed between us, and I have 



157 



no objections to it. All here think it unfair and wrong for 
any member of the Presbytery to exhibit a partial statement. 
You will be convinced, ere long, that all the opposition made 
to me this winter will result in great good to myself. Your 
publishing my letter to you in August last, or that part of it re- 
lating to Mrs. Hearsey, will injure you more than me, because 
all see that it was not an attack on Mrs. Hearsey, except by 
a forced construction. I wish to have nothing done in a hug- 
germugger style. Let every thing be brought to light. I 
thank you for the candour and kindness evinced in your last ; 
I doubt not but that you wish to have that done which is most 
for the honour of our Master. 
" Yours, in hope of a glorious immortality through Christ, 

"T. CLAPP." 

Resolved, that in compliance with a recommendation of the 
Committee of investigation in the case of the Rev. Theodore 
Clapp, a Committee of prosecution, consisting of two persons, 
be now appointed. Whereupon the Rev. Messrs. Smylie and 
. J ohn L. Montgomery were elected. 

Curmel Church, April Dth, 1832. 
The Committee of prosecution submitted the following 
charges to the consideration of the Presbytery, viz. 

Carmel Church, April 9th, 1832. 
The Committee of prosecution appointed by the Presby- 
tery in compliance with the recommendation of the Com- 
mittee of investigation, have received and examined the docu- 
ments referred to in their report in the case of the Rev. The- 
odore Clapp. It is their deliberate and solemn conviction 
that the purity and peace of the Presbyterian church imperi- 
ously demand a trial of the Rev. Theodore Clapp on the fol- 
lowing charges. These charges fall under two different heads, 
viz. doctrine and deportment. 

CHARGE L 

The Rev. Theodore Clapp is charged with having avowed 



158 



and taught doctrines inconsistent with the Confession of Faith 
and Catechism of the Presbyterian church in the United 
States of America, after having solemnly adopted these stand- 
ards. 

CHARGE II. 

The Rev. Theodore Clapp is charged with having been 
guilty of immoral and unchristian conduct. 

Under the first of the above charges the Committee of pro- 
secution make the following specifications, viz. 

Specification 1. Avowing and teaching doctrines incon- 
sistent with the doctrine of original sin as taught in the Con- 
fession of Faith and Catechisms of our church. 

Spec. 2. Denying the doctrine of the Holy Trinity as 
taught in the Confession of Faith and Catechisms. 

Spec. 3. Avowing and teaching doctrines inconsistent 
with the decrees of God as taught in the Confession of Faith 
and Catechism. 

Spec 4. Denying that a belief in the divinity of Christ is 
essential to salvation. 

Spec. 5. Denying the Christian sabbath to be perpetually 
binding, and speaking of it in such a way as to make the im- 
pression that he believed it optional with mankind whether 
they keep it holy or not. 

Spec 6. Denying the efficacy of intercessory prayer. 

The above charge will be substantiated by the testimony of 
the following witnesses, viz. Hon. Samuel H. Harper, Alfred 
Hennen, Esq. J. N. Maybin, Esq. Dr. John Rollins, Dr. John 
R. Moore, Dr. T. O. Meaux, Rev. Silas H. Hazard, Rev. 
Gorden Winslow, Messrs. Robert H. M'Nair, W. W. Cald- 
well, H. Farrie, Ebenezer Lane, L. I. Robbins, Truman Par- 
mele, Thomas Smith, William Clarke, Samuel Slater, I. S. 
Walton, Mrs. Margaret M'Nair, Mrs. D. A. Hearsey, Mrs. 
Stella Spriggs, Mrs. Harper, Mrs. Ann Davison, Mr. F. R. 
Southmayd, Rev. Messrs. Chase, Donan, and John B. War- 
ren ; also written documents. 



159 



CHARGE IL 

Under this charge the Committee of prosecution make th© 
following specifications, viz. 

Specification 1. Slanderous and unchristian statements 
in relation to sundry professors of religion in the city of New 
Orleans. 

Spec 2. Slanderous statements in relation to sundry bre- 
thren in the ministry. 

Spec. 3. Falsehood in denying the slanderous statements 
he made in relation to Mr. Farrie, Madams Hearsey and Hill, 
in his letter to the Rev. G. Potts, and denying his having used 
Mrs. Hill's name at all. 

Spec. 4. Falsehood in stating, after his return from the 
Presbytery at Port Gibson in October, 1831, that the diffe- 
rences between him and the Mississippi Presbytery were en- 
tirely settled. 

Spec 5. Falsehood in reporting that it was with explana- 
tions that he signed the questions, a copy of which is contain- 
ed in the printed minutes, pages 60 and 61. 

Spec 6. Falsehood in declaring that the statements in the 
pastoral letter sent by the Presbytery to the first Presbyterian 
church in New Orleans were false in detail and in toto. 

This second charge will be substantiated by the testimony 
of the witnesses and the documents mentioned under the first 
charge, and also by Mrs. C. Robbins, N. Goodall, Rev. Wil- 
liam Montgomery, and William G. Hughs. 

JAMES SMYLIE, > Committe of 

JOHN L. MONTGOMERY, > Frosecution. 

Whereupon, resolved, that the Committee be directed to 
prosecute the charges, and that the moderator and clerk pro- 
ceed to issue citations. On motion, resolved, that we adopt 
the following form in the citation of witnesses, viz. 
A.B. 

You are hereby cited to appear before the Presbytery 
of Mississippi, adjourned to meet on the day of month 
at the Baptist church in the city of New Orleans, or wherever 



160 



the Presbytery may afterwards meet in that city, to give tes- 
timony in the case of the Committee of prosecution versus 
Theodore Clapp, now pending in the said Presbytery. 

And that the following be the form of citation to the per- 
son accused, viz. 

Carmel Church, April 9th, 1832. 

Rev. Theodore Clapp. 

Sir. — You are hereby cited to appear before the Presbytery 
of Mississippi, at an adjourned meeting to be held at the 
Baptist church in New Orleans on Thursday the 3d day of 
May next at eleven o'clock, A. M. to answer to certain 
charges preferred against you by the Committee of prosecu- 
tion appointed by this Presbytery. Accompanying this you 
have a copy of the charges and specifications, together with 
the names of the witnesses to support them. By order of the 
Presbytery, 

J. H. VANCOURT, Moderator. 

April \Qth, 1832. 
Resolved, that the Rev. Peter Donan be directed to attend 
to the citation of witnesses and the accused in the case of the 
Rev. T. Clapp. 

New Orleans, May 3c?, 1832. 

On motion, resolved, that the trial of the Rev. Theodore 
Clapp be the order of the day at 4 o'clock, P. M. 

Resolved, that we have a recess until 4 o'clock P. M. 

After recess, the Presbytery resumed business, and pro- 
ceeded to the order of the day for this hour. The modera- 
tor solemnly announced from the chair that the body was 
about to proceed to the consideration of the business assigned 
for trial, and enjoined on the members to recollect and regard 
their high character as judges of a court of Jesus Christ, and 
the solemn duty in which they were about to act. 

The moderator proceeded to read the charges and speci- 
fications against the Rev. Theodore Clapp, and called on him 
to state whether he were guilty or not. To which he repli- 
ed, " Not Guilty." 





161 



On motion, Resolved that we now proceed to take the tes- 
timony in the case of the Rev. Theodore Clapp. 

Dr. John R. Moore was introduced by the Committee of 
prosecution, and being duly sworn, testified as follows — 

1. Question by the Committee. Did you hear Mr. Clapp 
avow or teach that the guilt of Adam's first sin was not 
imputed to his posterity ? 

Ans. Yes. 

2. Ques. Did you hear Mr. Clapp avow or teach that 
children were not guilty for Adam's first sin ? 

Arts. Yes. 

3. Ques. by Mr. Montgomery. Did you understand Mr. 
Clapp as denying the depravity of human nature ? 

Ans. I have always understood Mr. Clapp to teach that 
mankind are not totally depraved. 

4. Ques. Spec. 3d. Have you heard Mr. Clapp preach 
against the decrees as stated in the Confession of Faith ? 

Ans. I have heard him preach against the decrees of God 
as set forth in the Confession of Faith. 

5. Ques. by Mr. Montgomery. Have you heard Mr. Clapp 
ridicule the system of doctrine called Calvinistic ? 

Ans. I would not say that I have heard him deliver a spe- 
cific sermon on that subject, or that he ridiculed that system 
of doctrines ; but I have heard him frequently make remarks 
that would be considered opposed to the Calvinistic system. 

6. Ques. Spec. 4th. Did you ever hear Mr. Clapp avow 
or teach that a belief in the divinity of Christ was not essen- 
tial to salvation ? 

Ans. Yes. 

7. Ques. Charge 2nd. Spec. 4. Did you hear Mr. 
Clapp state, on his return from the meeting of Presbytery at 
Port Gibson, that the differences between him and the Mis- 
sissippi Presbytery were entirely settled ? 

Ans. Yes, I did. 

CROSS EXAMINED BY MR. CLAPP. 

8. Ques. Did you ever understand me to deny the ori- 
ginal rectitude of Adam, and his subsequent apostacy ? 



162 



Ans, No. 

9. Ques. Did you ever hear me avow and teach that? 
in consequence of Adam's apostacy, all children became 
sinners as soon as they are capable of sinning ? 

Ans. I have, but that Adam's sin was not imputed to them. 

10. Ques. Are you certain that I used the language, 
that a belief in the divinity of Christ was not essential to 
salvation ? 

Ans. Yes. 

11. Ques. Have you not heard me, in descanting on the 
divinity of Christ, say that the truth, on whichever side it lay, 
was infinitely important ? 

Ans. I have heard you make these remarks in relation to 
the importance of truth in general, but not in connection with 
the subject and time to which I refer. 

The above testimony and questions, were read to the par- 
ties, and their approbation given as to its correctness. 

May, 4th 1832. 
Mr. R. H. M'Nair was introduced, and being duly sworn, 
testified as follows, viz. 

QUESTIONS BY THE COMMITTEE. 

Ques. 1. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp deny 
the doctrine of original sin ? 
Ans. I think I have. 

Ques. 2. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp 
avow and teach that children are not depraved by nature 
until they become actual transgressors ? 

Ans. I have heard him teach that doctrine. 

Ques. 3. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp 
avow and teach that Adam's first sin was not imputed to his 
posterity ? 

Ans. I have. 

Ques. 4. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp 



163 



avow and teach that Adam's first sin hurt no one but him- 
self? 

Ans. That we would not be punished for Adam's trans- 
gressions. 

Ques. 5. Have you or have you not heard him deny the 
doctrine of the Holy Trinity ? 

Ans. I believe I have not heard him deny the doctrine of 
the Holy Trinity. 

Ques. 6. Have you or have you not heard him denounce 
the doctrine of the decrees of God ? 

Ans. If you mean the doctrine of Election, I have heard 
him. 

Ques. 7. Have you or have you not heard him denounce 
the distinguishing doctrines of Calvinism ? 

Ans. I think I have, such as I view to be the distinguishing 
doctrines of Calvinism. 

Here Mr. Clapp spoke and acknowledged he had denounc- 
ed the distinguishing doctrines of Calvinism. 

Ques. 8, Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp 
deny that a belief in the divinity of Christ was essential to 
salvation ? • 

Ans. I remember an occurrence which would seem to in- 
dicate it. In a conversation respecting the death of a cer- 
tain individual, who was understood to be a Unitarian, Mr. 
Clapp said to the wife of that individual, it would not be ask- 
ed at the bar of God whether he were a Unitarian or not ; so 
Mr. Clapp told me. 

Ques. 9. Have you or have you not heard him denounce 
the Confession of Faith of the Presbyterian church as full of 
blunders ? 

Ans. Mr. Clapp I believe to be opposed to all creeds and 
Catechisms. I have heard him denounce them from the 
pulpit as the invention of man. 

Ques. 10. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp 
avow and teach that the Christian sabbath is not perpetually 
binding? 

23 



164 



Ans. I think Mr. Clapp, in the Bible class and elsewhere, 
taught that, on account of the example of the Apostles, it was 
binding. 

Ques. 11. Have you or have you not heard him express 
the opinion that an honest deist would go to heaven ? 

Ans. I do not recollect such a declaration in relation to a 
deist, but I have heard him say Mahomedans and Turks might 
go to heaven. 

Ques. 12. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp de- 
clare that intercessory prayer was of no avail except to the 
person praying ? 

Ans. I have heard much conversation among Mr. Clapp's 
people upon the subject, but I do not remember having any 
conversation with him upon the subject, nor do I remember 
to have heard him preach upon the subject. 

.Ques. 13. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp 
speak of the sabbath in such a way as to leave the impression 
that he did not think it of much importance in the sight of 
God whether it was kept holy or not ? 

Ans. I think I have not heard him so speak. 

Ques. 14. Have you had any conversation with Mr. Clapp 
upon the subject ? 

Ans. I have, in company with others. 

Ques. 15. Have you heard of a letter written by Rev. Mr. 
Clapp to Rev. Mr. Potts, in which disrespectful mention was 
made of Messrs. Ross, Rollins, Caldwell, Farrie, and Madams 
Hearsey and Hill ? 

Ans. I have heard a great deal of conversation on that sub- 
ject. 

Ques. 16. Will you be so good as to relate the circum- 
stances in which that conversation occurred. 

Ans. I thought Mrs. M'Nair's conversation indicated to 
Mr. Clapp that he ought not to have used Mrs. Hearsey's 
name in a disrespectful manner. Mr. Clapp attempted to jus- 
tify himself, by alluding to some circumstances of a domes- 
tic character in Mr. Fame's family, which Mr. Clapp alleged 
as a justification for the language used in the letter to Mr. 
Potts, of gross iniquity. Mrs. M'Nair continued the conver- 



165 



saltan by insisting that Mrs. Hearsey's name ought not to 
have been used in connection with such circumstances. Mr. 
Clapp replied that Mr. Farrie was a talented man, and might 
have influenced the persons named in that letter. Mrs. 
M £ Nair replied she was not acquainted with Mr. Farrie, and 
did not know that Mr. Farrie could exact such an influence. 

Ques. 17. Did you hear Mr. Clapp deny his writing any 
thing disrespectful in relation to the persons above named ? 

Ans. I remember his saying that he had not said any thing 
improper of Mrs. Hearsey. 

Ques. 18. Was this since the 10th of August 1831 ? 

Ans. I think it was. 

Ques. 19. Witness will say whether Mr. Clapp's conversa- 
tion produced the impression that Mr. Clapp thought Mr. Far- 
rie was inimical to him at that time. 

Arts. It produced the impression that he was now, or had 
been. 

Ques. 20. Have you heard Mr. Clapp speak disrespectfully 
of the Rev. B. Chase within the last twelve months ? 
Ans. I have not. 

Ques. 21. Have you heard him speak disrespectfully of the 
Rev. S. H. Hazard within a year ? 
Ans. I have not. 

Ques. 22. Who are esteemed his, Mr. Hazard's, best friends 
in New Orleans ? 

Ans. His brother and his christian friends. 

Ques. 23. Have you heard him speak disrespectfully of the 
Rev. George Potts ? 

Ans. Not within twelve months I think. 

Ques. 24. Did you or did you not hear Mr. Clapp, on his 
return from the meeting of the Presbytery at Port Gibson, say 
that the differences between him and the Mississippi Presby- 
tery were entirely settled ? 

Ans. I met Mr. Clapp in the street, and he expressed the 
gratification he received from his reception at the Presbytery 
by the brethren, particularly Mr. Butler, who had spoken in 
his favour. Mr. Clapp said that all things were very agreea- 
ble ; that he would attend the Presbytery in future ; and the 



166 



impression was made upon my mind that the matter was all 
settled. Shortly after, he called at my house, and said that, 
inasmuch as there might be much said on this subject, he 
thought proper to state that there was a Committee appoint- 
ed. 

CROSS EXAMINED BY MR. CLAPP. 

Ques. 1. Have you not heard me avow and teach the ori- 
ginal rectitude of Adam and his subsequent apostacy ? 

Ans, Yes, I have heard you avow and teach this. 

Ques, 2. Have you heard me avow and teach the doctrine, 
that in consequence of our first parents' apostacy all children 
become sinners as soon as they are capable of sinning ? 

Ans, Yes, I have heard you teach that doctrine. 

Ques, 3. Have you heard me denounce in toto the Confes- 
sion of Faith ? 

Ans. I have heard you say that the Apostles did not go out 
with church articles in their pockets, mentioning a considera- 
ble number. 

Ques, 4. Do you remember of my expressing the opinion, 
that, in consequence of the circumstance alluded to, Mr. Far- 
rie had become hostile to me, and had influenced the mind of 
Mrs. Hearsey ? 

Ans, Yes. 

QUESTION BY MR. DONAN. 

Do you know whether Mr. Clapp has preached one set of 
sentiments in the pulpit, and then explained them away in con- 
versation ? 

Ans, The impression on my mind is that he has done this. 
I have heard Mr. Clapp say, that if the death of Christ pro- 
cured salvation only for a part of mankind, he did not thank 
him ; and, in explaining that to others, the declaration was 
considerably softened, so that it did not appear alarming to 
them. 



167 



QUESTIONS BY THE COMMITTEE, ASKED BY PERMISSION. 

Ques. 1. Do Mr. Clapp's public declarations correspond with 
his private declarations upon the same subjects ? 
Ans. I think not. 

Ques. 2. Do you know any instance in which Mr. Clapp's 
public declarations are at variance with his private statements 
respecting the same subject ? 

Ans. I do. It is my opinion that Mr. Clapp's subscription 
to the question respecting communing with Unitarians, is at 
variance with his declarations to me upon that subject in pri- 
vate ; and also his subscription to the question respecting 
Creeds and Confessions contained in the printed extracts. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in presence 
of the parties, and approved. 

Rev. Gordon Winslow was introduced by the Committee, 
and, being duly sworn, testified as follows : — 

Ques. 1. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp deny 
the doctrine of original sin ? 

Ans. I can't say that I have. I have heard him say that he 
did not consider sin as imputed to us. 

Ques. % Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp avow 
and teach that children are not depraved by nature until they 
become actual transgressors ? 

Ans, Yes, I think I have. 

Ques. 3. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp say 
that intercessory prayer was of no avail except to the person 
praying ? 

Ans. I have not heard him say so. 

Ques. 4. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp deny 
the doctrine of the Holy Trinity ? 

Ans. I have not heard him, but I have heard him avow it. 

Ques. 5. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp de- 
nounce the Confession of Faith of the Presbyterian church ? 

Ans. I cannot say that I have. I have heard him express a 



163 



wish that there might be an alteration, or something to that 
effect ; but cannot say I heard him denounce it. 

Ques. 6. Have you or have you not heard him avow and 
teach that the christian sabbath was not perpetually binding ? 

Ans. I have not. 

Ques, 7. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp make 
any slanderous statements against any of his brethren in the 
ministry ? 

Ans. I have heard him make rash and imprudent assertions, 
but did not consider them as amounting to slander. 

CROSS EXAMINED BY MR. C LAPP. 

Ques. Do you remember of my making use of any expres- 
sions in favour of my brethren ? 
Ans. I do. 

Question by the moderator. Do you know any thing fur- 
ther in relation to doctrine or deportment of the Rev. Theo- 
dore Clapp, which would operate either for or against him ? 

Ans. I have heard Mr. Clapp preach upon the subject of 
regeneration, and he explained it as I have been in the habit 
of hearing it explained. Also upon depravity, the divinity 
of Christ, and the atonement. Upon the divinity of Christ he 
was very full and explicit ; he said he knew there was a va- 
riety of opinions respecting his views upon that subject. He 
wished it understood that he ever had believed Him to be the 
author of all things, material and immaterial ; that he existed 
from eternity in the bosom of the Father; -that he was the 
author of the Bible, and would judge the world. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in the pre- 
sence of the parties, and approved. 

Mr. William Hazard was introduced, and, being duly sworn, 
testified as follows : 

Question 1, by the Committee. Are you the brother of 
Silas H. Hazard ? 
Ans. I am. 



/ 



169 

Ques. 2. Have you ever admitted that Silas H. Hazard is 
extremely apt to misunderstand and misreport what he had 
heard in conversation ? 

Ans. I have not. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in the pre- 
sence of the parties, and approved. 

Rev. Peter Donan was introduced, and being duly sworn, 
testified as follows : 

Questioti 1, by the Committee. Have you or have you not 
heard Mr. Clapp deny the doctrine of original sin ? 

Ans. I have heard him deny what some call the doctrine of 
original sin, but he has always admitted to me that mankind 
were involved in the consequences of Adam's sin. 

Ques. 2. Have you or have you not heard him avow and 
teach that children are not depraved by nature until they be- 
come actual transgressors ? 

Ans. Yes, I distinctly remember that. 

Ques. 3. Have you or have you not heard him avow and 
teach that Adam's sin was not imputed to his posterity t 

Ans. I have heard him. 

Ques. 4. Have you or have you not heard him avow and 
teach that Adam's sin hurt no one but himself? 

Ans. No, I never did. The idea that Mr. Clapp has uni- 
formly avowed, was, that Adam's posterity were injuriously 
affected by it. 

Ques. 5. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp de- 
nounce the distinguishing doctrines of Calvinism? 

Ans. I have not. I have heard him say that he did not 
believe the old points of Calvinism, but was in substance a 
Calvinist. 

Ques. 6. Have you or have you not heard him denounce 
the doctrine of the decrees of God ? 
Ans. No, I have not heard him. 

Ques. 7. Have you or have you not heard him denounce 
the Confession of Faith of the Presbyterian church ? 
Ans. I have not heard him. 



170 



Ques. 8. Did you or did you not hear him deny that a be- 
lief in the divinity of Christ was essential to salvation ? 

Ans. Mr. Clapp advanced the sentiment that he believed 
many Unitarians would be saved, but at the same time he 
has uniformly advanced the sentiment to me that he believed 
Christ was divine. 

Ques. 9. Does the witness mean that he advanced this in 
the same connection, or in another ? 

Ans. To the best of my recollection it was much in the 
same connection. 

Ques. 10. How long since was this ? 

Ans. Within about eight months. 

Ques. 11. How long since you became acquainted with 
Mr. Clapp, and had these conversations with him ? 
Ans. At our last October meeting. 

Ques. 12. Did you hear Mr. Clapp, since April 1831, 
make slanderous statements in relation to sundry professors 
of religion in the city of New Orleans ? 

Ans. I did not. 

Ques. 13. Did you or did you not hear Mr. Clapp make 
slanderous statements in relation to sundry brethren in the 
ministry ? 

Ans. I did not. 

Ques. 14. Did you hear Mr. Clapp state that he gave ex- 
planations in signing the questions at Port Gibson ? 

Ans. Mr. Clapp has said to me the whole account of the 
matter was thus : — the Committee appointed to examine Mr. 
Clapp's letter took it into consideration, and had some con- 
versation with him respecting it. We immediately found 
there were some points of doctrine ambiguously expressed in 
the letter ; we therefore wrote off some questions embracing 
those points, and proposed them to Mr. Clapp for his subscrip- 
tion. He made remarks upon them ; and all his explanations 
to us tended to this one point, — that he substantially adopted 
the same sentiments expressed in the questions. A few of 
his answers were given somewhat at large, partly written 
with ink and partly with pencil. These questions we sub- 
mitted to the Presbytery ; and, to the best of my recollection, 



ill 



before we had gone through with them the Presbytery re- 
fused to receive such a document, which they considered 
quite as ambiguous as the letter ; and therefore sent us back 
to reduce the questions to a more definite form and obtain 
more definite answers. We therefore wrote the questions 
off in the form in which they now stand in the printed mi- 
nutes, and Mr. Clapp signed them without giving any expla- 
nations either to the Committee or the Presbytery. 

Ques. 15. When the final report of the Committee was 
handed in to the Presbytery, was it not accepted ? 

Ans. Yes. 

Ques. 10. What did the witness understand by accepting 
the report ? 

Ans. Merely taking it out of the hands of the Committee, 
without reference to its adoption ; for I am certain there was 
a motion made for adopting the report, which was lost. The 
adoption of the report would have made the sentiments of 
the Committee the sentiments of the Presbytery. 

Ques. 17. Was or was not the report passed over into the 
hands of the Committee of investigation ? 

Ans. It was. 

Ques. 18. Does the witness recollect whether Mr. Clapp 
was present at the time of those transactions ? 

Ans. I think he was, I recollect having some conversation 
with him at that time. 

CROSS EXAMINED BY MR. CLAPP. 

Ques. 1. Does the witness recollect the place where the 
first conversation occurred between us on doctrinal subjects ? 
Ans. I do, it was at Brother Butler's fire-side. 
Ques. 2. Was it a lengthened conversation ? 
Ans. It was. 

Ques. 3. Do you remember distinctly the topics of our 
conversation ? 

Ans. 1 remember one. 

Ques. 4. Will the witness please to state ? 

Ans. One was the character of infants as they came into 
the world, 

24 



172 



Ques. 5. Do you remember of our conversing on what 
were the distinguishing points between the New and Old 
School? 

Ans. That was the subject of our conversation. 

Ques. 6. During that conversation, did we not discuss most 
of the subjects which are now controverted between what 
are called the Old and New School in the Presbyterian 
church ? 

Ans. Those were the subjects of conversation. 

Ques. 7. Does the witness remember whether we had fre- 
quent conversations on doctrinal subjects subsequently to our 
first interview ? 

Ans. I do recollect that we had. 

Ques. 8. Do you remember expressing the opinion that 
you would be perfectly satisfied to have me remain in the 
Presbyterian church, provided my views were coincident 
with those of the New School ? 

Ans. No, I did not express it at our first interview, but 
did during that meeting at Port Gibson. 

Ques. 9. For what purpose does the witness suppose the 
Presbytery wished to know whether my views were coinci- 
dent with the Presbyterian church ? 

Ans. To find out whether they should proceed to try you, 
or the matter should be amicably settled. 

Ques. 10. What does the witness believe was the object 
which the Presbytery had in view in appointing the Com- 
mittee of which he was the chairman, to confer with me and 
to examine my letter in relation to my tenets ? 

Ans. We supposed the Presbytery wanted to find through 
us, by our conference with you and by examining your letter, 
whether you held the same views which were held by the 
Presbyterian church generally. 

Ques. 11. Did not the chairman of the Committee believe 
that my views were at that time coincident with the New 
School ? 

Ans. I did ; I was not aware at that time that there was 
any difference of opinion on election and perseverance be- 
tween the Old and New School ; and my opinion from your 



173 



explanations was, that you, on these two doctrines, held the 
sentiments of the Old School. 

Ques. 12. Did you not express to me the opinion that the 
Presbytery had sufficient grounds to make an amicable set- 
tlement ? 

Jlns. As all your explanations tended to convince us that 
you held substantially the same views which are held by the 
Presbyterian church in general, we did think so. 

Ques. 13. Did not the witness believe, prior to our first 
interview, that I held erroneous views on the divinity of our 
Saviour and the atonement ? 

Jlns. I suppose so. 

Ques. 14. During our successive interviews was this im- 
pression removed ? 

Jlns. From repeated declarations made at Port Gibson 
that impression was removed. 

Ques. 15. Does the witness recollect how many meetings 
took place between the Committee and myself ? 

Jlns-. We had two general meetings. 

Ques. 16. Was the first thing done between me and the 
Committee a conversation upon the letter of October 14, 
1831 ? 

Jlns. That is rather my impression. 

Ques. 17. Does the witness admit, that, on expressing the 
opinion that parts of this letter might be construed in an un- 
favourable manner, he received such explanations as satisfied 
the Committee that there was nothing in my sentiments that 
rendered it improper for me to continue to be a member of 
the Presbyterian church ? 
Jlns. Yes. 

Ques. 18. Will the witness state why, since he and the 
Committee were satisfied by the letter and accompanying ex- 
planations made verbally, that I might continue lawfully a 
member of the Presbyterian church, interrogations were sub- 
sequently proposed to me to be answered ? 

Jlns. The questions were proposed that the Presbytery- 
might know definitely what your views of doctrine in general 
were. 



174 



New Orleans, May 5th, 1832. 

Minutes of the last session were read as far as the com- 
mencement of the testimony, when, on motion, resolved that 
the reading of that part of the minutes be dispensed with 
until after the witness has closed his testimony. 

Rev. Peter Donan was called on to resume his testimony. 

CROSS EXAMINATION CONTINUED BY MR. CLAPF. 

Ques. 1. Does the witness recollect stating to me, at the 
first time he propounded the questions to me, that the ma- 
jority of Presbytery were already satisfied with my explana- 
tions? 

Ans. I do not distinctly remember at what stage of the ex- 
amination I made a remark of that nature to Mr. Clapp, but 
I recollect remarking to him, during some part of the exami- 
nation, I rather thought such was the case. 

Ques. 2. Do you remember stating to me, when interroga- 
tories were proposed to me the first time, that those members 
who wanted me to subscribe to the interrogatories were dis- 
satisfied with my phraseology in former explanations, but 
believed my real opinions to be substantially correct ? 

Ans. I do not. 

Ques. 3. Does Mr. Donan remember my expressing a wish 
that every thing which took place between me and the Com- 
mittee might be recorded ? 

Ans. I do not remember it. 

Ques. 4. Does Mr. Donan remember saying that it was 
chiefly with my language in the letter and accompanying ex- 
planations that the older members of Presbytery were dis- 
satisfied ? 

Ans. I do not remember making any such remark. 

Ques.* 5. Will Mr. Donan then state what were the reasons 
he assigned to me why he presented the interrogatories the 
first time ? 

Ans. It was to give to the Presbytery a definite view of 
what Mr. Clapp's real sentiments were, which his letter did 
not give. 



175 



Ques. 6. When I subscribed the interrogations the first 
time, was not the subscription accompanied with explana- 
tions ? 

Ans. The answers to a few of the questions were given 
somewhat at large. 

Ques. 7. Does Mr. Donan remember any of those answers 
accompanying the first subscription ? 

Ans. I do not distinctly remember, except that, as far as I 
recollect, " Yes" was given in answer to several of them. 

Ques. 8. Do you remember, that in conversation at the last 
meeting of Presbytery at Carmel church, you spoke to me 
of my answer in the first subscription concerning Trinity ? 

Ans. I do not remember speaking to you of it. 

Ques. 9. What was the reason assigned to me by the Com- 
mittee for proposing the interrogatories the second time at 
Port Gibson? 

Ans. The true reason why the interrogations were pro- 
posed a second time was, that the Presbytery was dissatisfied 
with your former answers. 

Ques. 10. Were my first answers shewn to any members 
of Presbytery besides the Committee ? 

Ans. Yes ; they were shewn to some members besides the 
Committee. 

Ques. 11. Were not the answers to the first questions read 
in the hearing of Presbytery. 

Ans. The answers to a part of them at any rate were read. 

Ques. 12. Did you not understand that my communications 
to the Committee were to be reported to Presbytery ? 

Ans. I understood that the result of our conversations and 
examination of the letter to Presbytery was to be reported 
to Presbytery. 

Ques. 13. During all our interviews at Port Gibson did 
you observe in me any want of candour, explicitness, or sin- 
cerity ? 

Ans. No, Sir, I did not. 

Ques. 14. Did you hear me preach in Port Gibson, and how 
many times ? 
Ans. I believe I heard you twice, 



176 



Ques. 15. Do you remember the subject upon which I 
preached ? 

Ans. One was on charity, and the other on the enmity of 
the carnal heart. 

Ques. 16. Did you hear any thing essentially erroneous in 
those sermons ? 

Ans. No, I did not ; they were both practical subjects ? 

Ques. 17. Do you remember where and when the sermon 
on charity was preached ? 

Ans. It was preached in Mr. Butler's new church, the first 
night after the Presbytery met. 

Ques. 18. Do you remember that, at the close of the sermon 
on charity, I alluded to the dissatisfaction which I had heard 
my sermon, the sabbath preceeding, had excited on the minds 
of some of Mr. Butler's church ? 

Ans. I remember, that after you had entirely finished the 
sermon, you made some remarks upon the subject. 

Ques. 19. Do you remember the views I then gave of elec- 
tion from the pulpit ? 

Ans. I do not remember. 

Ques. 1. by Mr. Blair. Will the witness state how long 
he had been a member of this Presbytery before the meeting 
at Port Gibson last fall ? 

Ans. About six months. 

Ques. 2. Was he or was he not acquainted with Mr. Clapp's 
case ? 

Ans. I had paid very little attention to the study of Mr. 
Clapp's case. 

Ques. 3. Did you not with a few others urge the appoint- 
ment of a Committee to confer with Mr. Clapp ? 
Ans. I do not remember it. 

Ques. 4. Was or was not the Committee composed of those 
who were in favour of appointing such a Committee ? 
Ans. It was. 

Ques. 5. Did or did not the Presbytery instruct that Com- 
mittee to propose any questions to Mr. Clapp ? 

Ans. The Presbytery instructed the Committee to examine 



m 

the letter, and hold conversation with Mr. Clapp ; but no in- 
structions were given them about asking him questions. 

Ques. 6. Where did the Committee and Mr. Clapp hold 
their conferences ? 

Jlns. We held them all in the back part of the Methodist 
church, and the Presbytery did their business in the front part 
of the house. 

Ques. 7. Where was Mr. Clapp when the Committee final- 
ly reported ? 

Jlns. In the house. 

Ques. 8. Did he or did he not express a wish to make ex- 
planations to the Presbytery respecting the sense in which we 
should understand the answers in the document appended to 
the report of the Committee at the time that the Committee 
finally reported ? 

Jlns. I remember, that in the early stage of the business 
something of the kind was said, but when the last report was 
signed, no explanations were given ; as some members of 
the Presbytery had uniformly declared that they would re- 
ceive no explanations, and wished to know definitely whether 
he did or did not adopt the sentiments contained in the ques- 
tions which we had written. 

Ques. 9. Did the Presbytery give official instructions to the 
Committee in relation to explanations ? 

Jlns. They said nothing about explanations, but they ap- 
pointed us to examine the letter and confer with him. 

Ques. 10. by Mr. Chase. Do you recollect whether, as 
Chairman of the Committee appointed to examine Mr, 
Clapp's letter, of October 14, 1831, and also to confer with 
him, that, in presenting your first report, you commenced by 
reading a portion of the report and accompanying it with re- 
marks. 

Ans. Yes, I do. 

Ques. 11. Was not the inquiry made by some member of 
the Presbytery, whether the Committee were presenting a 
written report or their talk ? 

Jlns. Yes. 

Ques. 12. Do you recollect that the Chairman replied, he 



178 



would commence and read his report through without re- 
marks ? 

Ans. Yes, I do. 

Ques. 13. Do you recollect whether, in the discussion which 
took place upon that report, the remark was made, either by 
the moderator or any member of the Presbytery, that it was 
not explanations which were wanted, but an explicit declara- 
tion of Mr. Clapp's views. 

Ans. I do, distinctly ; the remark was reiterated by the 
members of the Presbytery. 

Ques. 14. Do you recollect whether it was stated by any 
member of the Presbytery, while that first report was under 
consideration, that there had been explanations enough given 
in former days, and that then something was required of Mr. 
Clapp which needed no explanations ? 

Ans. Yes, that remark was made and repeated. 

Ques. 15. Were those remarks made in Mr. Clapp's pre- 
sence or absence ? 

Ans. To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Clapp was pre- 
sent during almost the whole of the time. 

Ques. 16. While that first report which was offered was 
under consideration, did Mr. Clapp make any remarks re- 
specting it ? 

Ans. I do not recollect that he did. 

Ques. 17. Was Mr. Clapp's signature appended to any of 
his answers given to the questions contained in the first re- 
port? 

Ans. His name was not signed at all upon the paper. 

Ques. 18. Do you recollect whether the remark was made, 
while that report was under consideration, that, with such a 
defect, a dispute might arise at some future day who was the 
author of those answers ? 

Ans. Yes, such a remark was made by some members of 
the Presbytery. 

Ques. 19. Were the questions contained in the printed 
extracts, pages 60 and 61, and signed by Mr. Clapp, the only 
questions which the Presbytery ever accepted of that Com- 
mittee on that subject ? 



179 



Arts. They were the only questions ever accepted by the 
Presbytery from the Committee. 

Quts. 20. Did the Committee present their second report, 
containing the questions signed by Mr. Clapp, as such an ex- 
pression of his views respecting the doctrines and principles 
there subscribed by him as they supposed he did not expect 
would be accompanied with explanations ? 

Ans. Mr. Clapp could not reasonably expect that, as the 
Committee had repeatedly told him that members of the 
Presbytery were not willing to receive explanations, but 
wanted to obtain a definite expression of his views. 

Ques. 21. Do you recollect that any member remarked, 
while the acceptance and adoption of the second report were 
under consideration, that he was satisfied with the written 
expressions of Mr. Clapp's views provided he were sincere ? 

Ans. I know that remark was made by at least one mem- 
ber of the Presbytery, and others seemed to concur. 

Ques. 22. . When the Presbytery had refused to adopt the 
report of the Committee of conference, did or did not the 
advocate of Mr. Clapp urge a reconsideration ? 

Ans. He did, vehemently. 

Ques. 23. Did not the Presbytery at first refuse to recon- 
sider ? 

Ans. I think there was opposition among some members of 
the Presbytery. 

Ques. 24. Did any of the advocates of Mr. Clapp complain 
of this as a grievance ? 

Ans. Yes, they did. 

Ques. 25. Did or did not the Presbytery agree to recon- 
sider ? 

Ans. I could not be certain. I think we, the advocates of 
Mr. Clapp, tried hard to get a reconsideration, but to the best 
of my recollection we did not succeed. 

Ques. 26. Did Mr. Clapp confer with his advocates during 
their exertions ? 

Ans. He did. 

Ques. 27. by the moderator. What further testimony have 
you to offer on this subject ? 

25 



180 



Ans. It is merely that Mr. Clapp has said to me, that he 
did not consider a belief of the divinity of Christ essential to 
salvation. On the subject of the Trinity, Mr. Clapp has said 
to me, he did not believe in three, what we call, persons in 
the Godhead. He said, in addition, that he believed in three 
facts : — that God was in the Father ; that God was in Christ, 
reconciling the world unto himself ; and that God was in the 
Spirit. Then said I to Mr. Clapp, don't you believe that they 
have distinct personal properties which cannot be communi- 
cated from the one to the other : — as, for instance, that the 
Father begets the Son ; the Son is begotten by the Father ; 
and that the Holy Spirit proceeds from both ? His remark 
was, I do not ; I believe there are three facts, but do not pre- 
tend to know any thing about the mode of their existence. 
I was very much dissatisfied (says the witness) with his views, 
and was afraid he was very near Unitarian or Sabellian 
ground on that subject. I told him so then, and have since. 
This conversation I had with Mr. Clapp in his study, since I 
came to New Orleans. Mr. Clapp, however, at the same 
time was unwilling to admit my inference, that he was either a 
Unitarian or Sabellian. 

New Orleans, May 7th, 1832. 
The clerks being absent, Rev. John R. Hutchison was ap- 
pointed temporary clerk, and the Presbytery proceeded to 
the examination of witnesses. Dr. John Rollins was intro- 
duced by the Committee of prosecution, and being duly 
sworn, testified as follows, viz : 

Ques. 1. by the Committee. Have you or have you not 
heard Mr. Clapp deny the doctrine of original sin ? 
Arts. I have. 

Ques. 2. Have you or have you not heard him avow or 
teach that children are not depraved by nature until they be- 
come actual transgressors ? 

Ans. I have. 

Qties. 3. Have you or have you not heard him avow or 
teach Adam's first sin was not imputed to his posterity ? 



181 



Ans. I have. 

Ques. 4. Have you or have you not heard him avow or 
teach that Adam's first sin hurt no one but himself? 

Ans. I cannot say that I ever heard him make use of these 
words. 

Ques. 5. Have you or have you not heard him deny the 
doctrine of the Holy Trinity ? 

Ans. I have heard him distinctly say that there were not 
three persons or agents in the Godhead. 

Ques. 6. Have you or have you not heard him avow or 
teach that the doctrine of three persons in the Godhead is 
Tritheism ? 

Ans. I have. 

Ques. 7. Have you or have you not heard him denounce 
the distinguishing doctrines of Calvinism ? 
Arts. I have. 

Ques. 8. Have you or have you not heard him denounce 
the doctrine of the decrees of God ? 

Ans. I have, as they are held and taught by John Calvin ; 
but I have heard him declare his belief in the decrees of God 
as held by John Wesley and Arminius. 

Here the accused made the following concession, viz : " I 
" have always uniformly opposed, and do now oppose, what I 
" conceive to be the distinguishing doctrines of Calvinism, with 
" the exception of the doctrine of the final perseverance of the 
" saints." 

Ques. 9. Have you or have you not heard him denounce 
the Confession of Faith of the Presbyterian church ? 

Ans. I have heard him denounce all Creeds, Confessions, 
and Catechisms, as fit for nothing but to be committed to the 
flames. 

Ques. 10. Have you or have you not heard him deny that a 
belief in the divinity of Christ was essential to salvation ? 

Ans. I have heard him say that no belief is essential to sal- 
vation, but that men would be judged according to their 
works and not according to their belief. 



182 



Ques. 11. Have you or have you not heard him express the 
opinion that an honest deist might go to heaven ? 
Jlns. 1 have not that I recollect. 

Ques. 12. Have you or have you not heard him avow or 
teach that the christian sabbath was not perpetually binding ? 

Jlns. I have heard Mr. Clapp preach from the pulpit that 
there is neither command, precept, nor example, in the New 
Testament for the keeping of the sabbath day. At the same 
time I have heard him say that it was right that men should 
keep it holy, because it was of great advantage to society to 
keep it ; and urge, in the strongest terms, that it ought to be 
kept holy by all. 

Ques. 13. Have you or have you not heard him declare 
that intercessory prayer was of no avail except to the person 
praying ? 

Arts. I have heard him distinctly say, that praying for others 
could not possibly have any effect upon them without a mira- 
cle ; and that all acknowledged that miracles had ceased, and 
that there were no miracles at the present day ; and further, 
that he knew of no good done by prayer, except the effect 
it had on the person praying. It was his opinion that it hum- 
bled the person praying before God. At the same time he 
gave it as his opinion, distinctly and clearly, that it was the 
duty of all to pray. 

The clerk and engrossing clerk appeared, and assigned rea- 
sons for tardiness, which were sustained. 

Ques. 14. Did you hear Mr. Clapp use slanderous or un- 
christian statements against professors of religion in New Or- 
leans ? 

Ans. I have not. 

Ques. 15. Did you hear Mr. Clapp use any slanderous or 
unchristian statements in relation to his brethren in the mi- 
nistry since April 1830 ? 

Ans. I have heard Mr. Clapp declare from the pulpit, on or 
about the 13th of November 1831, that all children that ever 
were, or ever will be, born into the world, were as pure and 



183 

as holy as the angels of Heaven, and continued to be so till 
they committed the first sin ; that they could not sin till they 
had sufficient light and knowledge to know the will of God 
and disobey it ; if they lived without committing that sin till 
twenty years old, they would be as pure and as holy as the 
angels in Heaven up to that time, some sooner and some later 
in life, according to the opportunity they had of acquiring in- 
formation. I have heard him also say from the pulpit, that 
much has been said and written about being born again, or 
the new birth, but it was perfectly simple, the easiest thing in 
the world to be understood ; that it was in doing that which 
was right in place of that which was wrong. That these senti- 
ments he had made known to a company of ministers of about 
twenty in the state of Mississippi, soon after his return from 
the Presbytery last fall ; and that they all agreed with him that 
these were their own sentiments, and the sentiments held by 
the Presbyterian church generally. Soon after Mr. Clapp's 
return from the last meeting of the Presbytery, he said Mr. 
Chase had stated that he gave no explanations to the Presby- 
tery in signing the questions, and a greater falsehood could 
not be stated by any man. 

Ques. 16. Has the witness or has he not heard Mr. Clapp 
state it was with explanations that he signed the questions at 
Port Gibson, a copy of which is contained in the printed ex- 
tracts, pages 60 and 61 ? 

Jins. I have heard him state that it was with explanations ; 
and charges the Presbytery with unjustness or unfairness in 
not entering those explanations on the records, as well as the 
direct answers. 

Ques. 17. Does the witness recollect that it was in relation 
to those explanations that Mr. Clapp charged the Rev. Mr. 
Chase with uttering a falsehood ? 

Ans. It was. 

CROSS EXAMINED BY MR. CLAPP. 

Ques. 18. Does the witness remember to have heard me 
say, I believe in God the Father, God the Son, and God the 
Holy Spirit? 



184 



Jlns. Yes, I have heard you say it. 

Ques. 19. Have you ever heard me address prayer to God 
the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit ? 
Arts. Certainly I have. 

Ques. 20. Has the witness ever heard me say that the con- 
sequence of Adam's fall extended to all his posterity ? 
Jlns. I have. 

Ques. 21. Have you heard me affirm that the moral nature 
of all mankind is in some way tainted in consequence of the 
apostacy of Adam ? 

Jlns. I have. 

Ques. 22. Have you not heard me express the following sen- 
timents : viz. " Let not the object of my remarks be misunder- 
" stood ; I believe in the doctrine of election, as I said in the 
" introduction of this discourse. The only point before us is, 
" what is the proper definition of the doctrine ? I define the 
" doctrine thus : — Election is that act of God by which he de- 
" termined from eternity to bestow everlasting life upon that 
" part of the fallen race of Adam whom he foresaw would re- 
" pent of their sins, believe in Christ, and persevere therein to 
" the end ; and to inflict everlasting punishment on those whom 
" he foresaw would die in unbelief and impenitence." 

Jlns. I have heard you preach and urge that doctrine often. 

Ques. 23. Have you ever heard me say that mankind would 
be saved because they merit salvation ? 

Jlns. No ; but you recommended prayer and good works 
as the means which God makes use of to save men, but not 
because of any merit in them. You said that if your congre- 
gation would use these means, they would every one be saved ; 
not from any merit in them, but because they are God's ap- 
pointed means. 

Ques. 24. Does the witness remember my using the follow- 
ing language ; viz. " Depend upon it, nothing is more con- 
" trary to the Bible and common sense, than the idea that God 
" created a part of the human family expressly to render them 
" miserable, and so shaped his government as to spread among 
" them everlasting confusion and wretchedness. Depend up- 
" on it, that if one human being is forever miserable, it will be 



185 



" contrary to the choice and will of God ; for Heaven is large 
" enough for us all, and it is the wish of our Heavenly Father 
" that we should all go to Heaven ; he sincerely and affec- 
" tionately invites us there. It is an idea which much better 
" deserves a place in some extravagant romance than a system 
" of theology, that God from eternity determined to make one 
" part of mankind forever miserable for the superior happiness 
" of the other ; that is, to injure a minority for the good of the 
"greater number. To do wrong to some for the greater 
" benefit of others, is not goodness, but wantonness and cruel- 
" ty. If, among sinners equally unworthy, God grants to 
" some the favour which he withholds from others ; or, if in 
" his sovereign wisdom he shows mercy to some, and inflicts 
" deserved punishment on others ; there is no injustice done. 
" This is all the particular election of which the Scriptures 
" speak." Is this a fair specimen of my preaching upon this 
subject? 

Jlns. That is a fair sample of your general preaching upon 
that subject. 

Ques. 25. Did you ever hear me say that persons of any re- 
ligious opinions whatever would be saved, without at the same 
time making some allusion to Christ's atonement ? 

Ans. I certainly have. 

Ques. 26. Do you believe that the general strain of my 
preaching upon this subject has been such as to produce in 
the congregation the opinion that I thought persons of any 
religious opinions could be saved, except upon the condition 
of the atonement ? 

Ans, I have not been a general hearer of your preaching, 
Mr. Clapp ; I can only say what has been the tenor of your 
preaching when I have heard you. The subject of the atone- 
ment has been so seldom brought forward, the impression has 
been upon my mind that it was of little importance in your 
estimation as it is held by the Presbyterian church. As far 
as I can understand, you have generally given the Arminian 
view of the subject. 

Ques, 27, Have you ever heard me declare from the pulpit 



186 



that there is no other name under Heaven given among men, 
whereby they can be saved, but that of Jesus of Nazareth ? 
Ans. I have, repeatedly. 

Ques. 28. What has been the general strain of my remarks 
on the importance of the christian sabbath ? 

Ans. I have heard Mr. Clapp repeatedly complain of the 
profanation of the christian sabbath, and bemoan the condition 
of this city in consequence of its violation. 

Ques. 29. Have you ever heard me censure the profanation 
of the sabbath as authorized by the civil authorities ? 

Ans. I certainly have. 

Ques. 30. Has the witness heard me condemn as wicked, 
irreligious, and unchristian, worldly recreations and business 
on the sabbath ? 

Ans. Certainly I have. 

Ques. 31. Have you been a regular attendant on my preach- 
ing for the last six years ? 
Ans. I have not. 

Ques. 32. Did you hear me give a definition of sin in my 
sermon delivered on the 13th of November last ? 

Ans. I did ; I heard you say sin was disobeying the will of 
God knowingly. 

Ques. 33. Is the witness confident he heard me make use 
of the words " pure and holy," in reference to children ? 

Ans. I am confident. 

Ques. 34. Does the witness recollect of having a conver- 
sation in the house where I reside, on the subject of the print- 
ed extracts and the accompanying explanations, in company 
with Mr. May bin ? 

Ans. I do not recollect ; we had some conversation rela- 
tive to the Mississippi Presbytery, but I do not recollect hav- 
ing any conversation about the printed extracts and accom- 
panying explanations ; it may be that we had ; I dont pre- 
tend to deny that we had. 

Ques. 35. Does the witness recollect hearing me say on 
that occasion that I had no doubt but the Mississippi Presby- 
tery did what they thought to be their duty ? 

Ans* 1 have heard you say so. 



187 



On motion, resolved, that we have a recess until 4 o*clock ? 
P.M. 

4 o'clock, P. M. 
The Presbytery resumed business, and the witness, Dr. 
John Rollins, proceeded to answer the following questions, 
which had been previously proposed by the Committee and 
left unanswered, viz. 

Qaes. 36. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp de- 
clare that the statements in the pastoral letter sent by the 
Presbytery to the first Presbyterian church in New Orleans, 
were false in detail and in toto ? 

Jins. I cannot say that I have in those express words, but 
in words to that effect : it was, — that the Presbytery had no 
authority over him or that church ; that he had organized that 
congregation as a congregational church, and that that con- 
gregation had laid in a call to the association to which he be- 
longed, and that then he was ordained the pastor of the con- 
gregational church in New Orleans, and was accountable 
only to this church, the people who had elected him their 
minister ; that whenever they said they did not want him, he 
would leave them, and not until then ; that the Presbytery 
had no more right to declare the congregation vacant than 
they had to declare the crown of Great Britain vacant, and 
go about to elect a new king. 

CROSS EXAMINED BY MR. CLAPP. 

Ques. Does the witness recollect the time when he heard 
me make those remarks ? 

Ans. Soon after the pastoral letter arrived in New Orleans. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in presence 
of the parties, and approved, and the witness discharged. The 
testimony of the Rev. Peter Donan was read to him in pre- 
sence of the parties, and approved, and the witness dis- 
charged. 



26 



188 



Tuesday, New Orleans, May 8th, 1832, 
Judge Harper was introduced by the Committee, and be- 
ing duly sworn, testified as follows : 

Ques. 1. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp deny 
the doctrine of original sin ? 

Ans. I have heard Mr. Clapp speak on that subject, both in 
private and public. If I have not misunderstood Mr. Clapp, 
his views are these : — I have understood Mr. Clapp to say 
that he did not believe the posterity of Adam and Eve were 
in any way accountable for their transgression ; yet that he 
believed the effect of their transgression had in some way or 
other injuriously affected the whole human race. I under- 
stood Mr. Clapp to say that original sin, as applicable to us, 
was the first sin that a rational and accountable being com- 
mitted. 

Ques. 2. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp avow 
or teach that the doctrine of three persons in the Godhead 
was Tritheism ? 

Jlns. On that subject I beg leave to refer the Presbytery 
to a letter which I addressed to the Rev. Mr. Chase, which 
is as follows : 

" New Orleans, 28/A March, 1832. 
" Rev. Sir. — I have received and read your letter of yes- 
terday. As I make it a rule to answer every gentleman who 
thinks proper to address a letter to me, I will not deviate 
from that course in this instance, although I regret the sup- 
posed necessity of appealing to me for evidence in a contro- 
versy in which an old friend is involved. It is true it is high 
time that portion of the public* who have been so long dis- 
turbed by the controversy alluded to, should be made fully 
acquainted with its merits ; yet I had hoped it would have 
been settled without any call upon me to interfere : but being 
thus called upon to give information on a subject with which 
I am somewhat acquainted, silence on my part would be both 
disrespectful and disingenuous. The last sentence of your 
letter, in the form of an interrogatory, is the only part of it 
to which my attention appears to be particularly called. Since 



189 



March, 1830, and indeed within a few months past, I heard 
the Rev. Theodore Clapp, in a sermon delivered by him in 
his church in New Orleans, state that he did not believe in a 
Trinity of persons or agents composing the Godhead, but that 
he believed in a Trinity of Facts, which I understood him to 
explain in this way : — that it is a fact that there is one God, 
the creator of all things ; a fact that there is a Redeemer ; and 
a fact that there is a Sanctifier : that these are modifications 
of one God, but in what manner those operations are per- 
formed he said he could not explain. That these facts corre- 
spond with the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost of the Trinita- 
rians, called by them three persons in the Godhead, which he 
said amounted in his judgment to Tritheism. I may not have 
given accurately his precise ideas on this subject, but I re- 
collect distinctly that it was the word persons or agents as 
applied to the Godhead with which he found fault I was 
therefore surprised to find his name signed to the first and se- 
cond interrogatories to which you allude, in which the words 
* person' and ' distinct personality' are apparently very signi- 
ficantly used ; but I was still more surprised at his subscrib- 
ing to the doctrine * that creeds are useful and necessary as 
definite expressions of what the Scriptures contain,' inasmuch 
as it is a matter of public notoriety, at least in this city, that 
Mr. Clapp has publicly denounced human creeds as injurious 
to the cause of religion ; calculated to give erroneous views 
of the Scriptures, and tending to embitter the minds of Chris- 
tians towards each other. In conclusion, I wish it distinctly 
understood that I did not at the time, nor do I now, find any 
fault with Mr. Clapp's views on both these subjects; but 
cannot reconcile them with the expression of his subsequent 
sentiments as contained in the printed extracts from the re- 
cords of the Mississippi Presbytery. 

" Respectfully, your obedient servant, 

" SAMUEL EL HARPER. 

u Rev. Benjamin Chase.'' 

Ques. 3. Have you or have you not conceded that Mr. Si- 



190 



las H. Hazard is extremely apt to misunderstand and misre- 
port what he hears in conversation ? 

Arts, I do not recollect of ever having made such a con- 
cession. 

Judge Harper has permission to retire, and give in his fur- 
ther testimony in writing to-morrow morning at 9 o'clock. 

Alfred Hennen, Esq. was introduced, and being duly 
sworn, testified as follows : 

Ques. 1. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp deny 
the doctrine of original sin ? 

Ans. I think I have heard Mr. Clapp distinctly state from 
the pulpit that children were not born guilty of the sin of 
Adam, that his sin could not be imputed to them; at the 
same time Mr. Clapp has uniformly stated, in connection with 
the same, that all children, as soon as arriving at the age of 
knowledge and discretion, did commit actual sin ; that such 
was a part of the constitution of their nature, inexplicable to 
us, but distinctly and fully revealed in the Scriptures ; it was 
a fact which we were bound to receive from them, because 
found there, and in accordance with our own observation. I 
do not remember to have heard Mr. Clapp state any opinion 
in contradiction to this view of the subject ; such at least has 
been the way that I have understood him, both in preaching 
and in his private conversations. I have always considered 
Mr. Clapp as substantially holding the same doctrines on this 
subject which I have conceived to be the doctrines held by 
the late Dr. D wight and others whom I have heard preach 
in New England. This I believe to be a full answer to this 
question so far as I know or remember to have heard him 
express his opinions. 

Ques. 2. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp avow 
or teach that the doctrine of three persons in the Godhead is 
Tritheism ? 

Arts. I have heard Mr. Clapp say that the views which 
some held respecting the word ' person' in the Godhead were 
incorrect ; that the word in itself was liable to lead some 



191 



astray ; and that the ideas entertained and expressed by some 
respecting this subject would lead to Tritheism. The doc- 
trine, however, which I have understood Mr. Clapp uniform- 
ly to preach upon this subject, was that in substance which I 
understood to be the received opinions of the orthodox clergy 
in New England. I have heard him state that many of the 
proof texts alleged in support of the doctrine of the Trinity 
were not strictly such ; that some texts had been urged in 
support of it which could fairly and properly admit of another 
interpretation. In some of his views in respect to these texts 
I have accorded with him, in others I did not think his rea- 
sons Conclusive. I have always considered Mr. Clapp as 
teaching that Jesus Christ was a divine person, to whom ado- 
ration was justly due ; that it was given to him by the apos- 
tles and primitive Christians, and that this was an argument 
that could not be met or resisted by Unitarians. From pri- 
vate conversations which I have had with him, I have con- 
sidered him as maintaining, on the subject of the Trinity, the 
same doctrines which are held by professor Stuart of Ando- 
ver in his printed publications. I cannot say I have ever 
heard Mr. Clapp distinctly deny the doctrine as generally 
held. I have long and carefully attended to and critically 
examined every thing that I ever heard him preach or say 
upon this subject, with a view of ascertaining precisely what 
were his opinions. At times he gave views upon the subject 
which were not exactly in direct accordance with my own. 
I cannot, however, say that they were in any way substan- 
tially erroneous, or in opposition to the orthodox opinion such 
as I conceive to be generally held upon the subject of the Tri- 
nity. My decided opinion is, that Mr. Clapp is not a Unita- 
rian. Such has always been his profession to me, and I have 
heard nothing in his preaching that I could think directly con- 
tradicting his profession. 

Ques. 3. On the subject of the christian sabbath, have you 
any statements to make ? 

Jlns. I have heard Mr. Clapp say that the christian sab- 
bath was different from that of the Jewish sabbath ; that the 
laws respecting the sabbath contained in the Books of Moses, 



192 



Independent of the Decalogue, were not obligatory on chris- 
tians ; that the last day of the week, observed by the Jews as 
a sabbath, was not to be observed by christians, but the first 
day. It would require much time to state fairly the views 
which Mr. Clapp lately gave in a sermon on that subject. I 
Would say, that his views in part were not those held by 
many ; yet I cannot consider them as essentially erroneous, 
although I might not be able to give my full assent to all that 
he said. In substance, I consider Mr. Clapp as supporting 
correct views on the subject of the sabbath ; sure I am that 
he has always inculcated a strict and religious observance of 
it by christians, and urged the great benefit, both temporal 
and spiritual, which must result to a community from a proper 
observance of it. 

Ques. 4. Does the witness recollect Mr. Clapp's giving his 
sentiments upon the subject of intercessory prayer ? 

Jlns. Some years since I remember hearing Mr. Clapp 
preach upon the subject. With part of his views at the time 
I did not accord, particularly when I first heard them uttered ; 
£hey struck me as in contradiction with the Scriptures. To- 
wards the close, however, of the same discourse, I thought he 
gave limitations and explanations which might be reconcilable 
with the Scriptures. I would not pretend at this moment, 
after so long a time, to give with accuracy the views upon the 
subject which I think he then preached. In substance, how- 
ever, I believe he stated that intercessory prayer was com- 
manded in the Scriptures, and established both by precept 
and example ; yet we could not distinguish or know the reason 
why it should operate as beneficial to individuals. 

Ques. 5. Witness will please to state whether he has or has 
not heard Mr. Clapp, since his return from the meeting of the 
Presbytery at Port Gibson, in October 1831, state that the 
differences between him and the Mississippi Presbytery were 
entirely settled ? 

Jins. I understood Mr. Clapp to say that the main subject 
of difficulty between himself and the Presbytery had been 
settled, and every thing was harmonious ; the precise extent 
or nature of which, however, I did not understand. He ne- 



193 



ver stated to me that any thing remained further to be done. 
I avoided asking any questions respecting it, or entering into 
any details, because I was always extremely averse to speak- 
ing or even thinking about it. I did not pay very particular 
attention to the words used, but the impression on my mind 
was, that no further difficulties of magnitude would occur. 
Perhaps this impression was left on my mind, that, as he held 
views which were termed those of the New School, in oppo- 
sition to those held by the Old School, that this subject might 
be again revived ; but that he thought it would be left to rest 
under the decision of the General Assembly. Of this, how- 
ever, I am not positive. 

Ques. 6. Has the witness or has he not heard Mr. Clapp 
say, that the sentiments contained in the pastoral letter sent to 
the first Presbyterian church in New Orleans were false in 
detail and in toto ? 

Ans. I cannot say that Mr. Clapp ever expressed himself 
directly in the manner supposed by this interrogatory. I be- 
lieve, however, that he said some facts in his favour were sup- 
pressed in that statement, and that others therein contained 
were incorrect. It would be impossible, however, to give the 
particulars of either. 

Ques. 7. Has the witness considered Judge Harper to be 
the particular friend of Silas H. Hazard ? 

Ans. I have considered Judge Harper to be a friend of Mr. 
Silas Hazard, though I do not recollect hearing Judge Harper 
say any thing respecting him. My idea is rather from the 
connexion of the family. 

CROSS EXAMINED BY MR. CLAPP. 

Ques. 1. Does Mr. Hennen remember, that in our private 
conversations I have often said that I believed the Mississippi 
Presbytery, in all their proceedings with respect to me, thought 
they were doing their duty ? 

Ans. I have heard Mr. Clapp express himself of the Pres- 
bytery in the manner supposed by this interrogatory at differ- 
ent times. 



194 



Ques. 2. Can Mr. Hennen say that at any time, during my 
residence in this city, there has been a general rumour here 
that I am a slanderer and a liar ? 

Ans. I have heard no such general rumour. Persons have 
spoken against Mr. Clapp, but I cannot pretend to say that 
any general rumour with respect to his character, as stated in 
the above interrogatory, has prevailed. 

Ques. by the moderator. Will the witness state whether 
he knows any thing more either for or against the charges 
brought against Mr. Clapp ? 

Ans. As a general view of my expressions concerning Mr* 
Clapp's doctrines, I would say that he adheres to what he 
terms, and I believe is generally termed, the New School in 
the Presbyterian church ; such he has professed his doctrines 
to be, and I have generally considered him as supporting them. 
Perhaps he may in some instances go in them further than 
others, though I have believed them in accordance with those 
held by the New School generally. With respect to Creeds, 
I have heard Mr. Clapp say that they are no further binding 
than as supported by the Scriptures ; that where passages are 
quoted in support of particular doctrines, we are at liberty to 
give the fair meaning to them which the originals would bear 
without reference to the translation ; that different views on 
minor points with respect to Creeds of the church might be 
held by different members of it without depriving them of the 
rights of such church. I have heard Mr. Clapp frequently 
state that all churches should hold to the Apostolic Creed as 
found in the Scriptures, and that included in substance all that 
could be fairly required ; that all christian churches and chris- 
tians should receive the Scriptures of the Old and New Tes- 
taments as found in the original language as the only true 
source of revealed doctrines, and the sole standard of their 
belief concerning them. I think I have heard Mr. Clapp say 
that the Creed commonly called the Apostles' Creed, though 
not written by them, contained in substance their creed. , 

The above testimony was read to the witness in the pre- 
sence of the parties, and approved, and the witness discharged. 



195 



Rev. S. H. Hazard was introduced, and being duly sworn* 
testified as follows : 

Ques. 1. Has the witness heard Mr. Clapp use any slander* 
ous or unchristian statements in relation to sundry brethren ill 
the ministry ? 

Ans. Immediately after the pastoral letter came to this city, 
I heard Mr. Clapp say of Mr. Chase, that he had stated to 
him that he would suffer him to read the pastoral letter before 
it was read to the church, and afterwards said he would not 
do so. His remark was, after he had made this statement to me, 
there is one lie. At the first meeting of the church after Mr. 
Chase left the city, Mr. Clapp, in the introduction of his re- 
marks upon the pastoral letter, stated that he believed the 
Presbytery were actuated by good motives in pursuing the 
course they had done, (or to that effect ;) that he did not impute 
arty bad motives to them ; and stated, I believe, that he had a 
high regard and respect for the members of the Presbytery ; 
believed them to be pious, good men. At the close of his re- 
marks he said : I can conceive of no motive by which they 
could be actuated in pursuing the course they have done but 
a desire to create schism and division in the church. A few 
days afterwards Mr. Clapp remarked to me in conversation, 
he did not know how it was that people misunderstood him 
so often. I stated that I could tell him, and reminded him of 
these contradictory statements above alluded to, at the com- 
mencement and end of his statement to the church, and said, 
Mr. Clapp, that is the way people misunderstand you. His 
reply was, that he believed the Presbytery thought it right to 
create schism in the church, or to that effect. 

Ques. 2. Were the witness and Mr. Clapp on terms of inti- 
mate friendship at that time ? 

Ans. Yes, we were. 

Ques. 3. What evidence had the witness that Mr. Clapp 
was particularly friendly at that time ? 

Jlns. He had exhibited his friendship in every way in his 
power, for which T did then, and do now, feel grateful. He 

■ 27 



196 



had also stated to me, that " I knew more of him than any man 
living." 

Mr. Clapp declined his privilege of cross examining the 
witness, saying he had no questions to ask. 

Ques. 1. by Mr. Chase. Does the witness recollect that he 
heard Mr. Clapp say that an honest deist might go to 
Heaven ? 

Ans. No. 

Ques. 2. Does the witness recollect of ever hearing Mr. 
Clapp say that he was a Duarian ? 

Ans. A conversation on the Trinity took place between 
Mr. Clapp and myself in his own study, in the early part of 
the year 1830, while I resided in his family. Mr. Clapp re- 
marked to me, " I am not a Trinitarian, I am a Duarian." 
At the same time he said to me, " I can say God the Father, 
God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit these remarks were 
made to me in confidence by Mr. Clapp. 

Ques. 3. Does the witness recollect whether Mr. Clapp 
was in the house during the discussion which took place in 
relation to the adoption of the second report of the Commit- 
tee of conference at Port Gibson ? 

Ans. I believe he was, 

Here Mr. Clapp conceded that he was present in the 
house during the discussion concerning the adoption of that 
report ; he remembered expressing to his friends the wish that 
it might not be adopted, because then the difficulties between 
him and the Presbytery would be open for future discussion. 

Ques. by the moderator. Have you any further testimony 
to offer respecting the charges against Mr. Clapp ? 

Ans. The subject of the christian sabbath was the subject 
of discussion one evening in the Bible class. His remarks 
were, that the obligations to observe the christian sabbath were 
not founded on the precepts of the Old Testament, but on 
apostolic example, historical evidence, and utility, Mr. Clapp 



197 



inculcated the strict and religious observance of the sabbath 
generally in his preaching, for ought that I know, as much as 
any one ; yet he said to me in conversation, that if an indi- 
vidual had any secular business to attend to, by attending to 
which he would realize some great advantage, and it did not 
require much time nor interefere with the public duties of re- 
ligion, it would be right for him to attend to it. This, to the 
best of my recollection, was the purport of his remarks at that 
time. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in the pre- 
sence of the parties, and approved, and the witness discharged. 

On motion, Resolved, that we adjourn to meet at Mr. Ro- 
bert H. M'Nair's at 4 o'clock this afternoon. 

4 o'clock, P. M. 
The Committee introduced Mrs. Margaret M'Nair, who 
being duly sworn, testified as follows : 

Ques. 1. by the Committee, Have you or have you not 
heard Mr. Clapp declare that intercessory prayer was of no 
avail except to the person praying ? 

Ans. In a conversation with me upon the subject, Mr. 
Clapp said, that prayer for others could do them no good ex- 
cept they were present ; and illustrated his meaning by saying, 
" do you suppose, if you had a child in Boston, that by praying 
" for her you could obtain any blessing which God would not 
" bestow without your prayers ?" He asked how the prayers of 
such creatures could affect the divine mind ; and said that 
God infinitely loved all creatures, and would bestow his bles- 
sing upon them without the prayers of others for them ; that 
those who thought they procured revivals of religion by their 
prayers, made themselves more benevolent than God. 

Ques. 2- Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp avow 
or teach that the christian sabbath is not perpetually binding? 

Ans. I have heard Mr. Clapp say that there was no com- 
mand in the Bible for the observance of the christian sabbath ; 
that the example of the apostles was binding. I thought Mr, 



198 



Clapp's taking away the command to observe the sabbath had 
a tendency to weaken the obligation to observe it, and several 
individuals told me that it had that effect upon their minds, 

Ques. 3. Will the witness please to state whether she has 
or has not heard Mr. Clapp make slanderous statements in 
relation to sundry professors of religion in New Orleans since 
April 1830? 

Ans. I asked Mr. Clapp whether he made use of any un- 
kind remarks about Mrs. Hearsey ? He said he had not, but 
had said in a letter which he wrote to Mr. Potts that the 
opposition to which she belonged originated in iniquity ; that 
some years ago he was sent for to visit Mr. Farrie's family, 
and that he then saw something, he did not say what, but gave 
me to understand it was something disgraceful, and that since 
that time Mr. Farrie had hated and opposed him ; and that Mr. 
Farrie had influenced Mr. Ross, and Mr. Ross had influenced 
Mrs. Hearsey. This conversation took place in November 
1831. 

Ques, 4. Has Mrs. M'Nair heard Mr. Clapp make slan- 
derous statements in relation to brethren in the ministry % 

Ans. About eighteen months ago I heard Mr. Clapp say,, if 
he was disposed to make mischief, he could relate things 
about the Rev. George Potts that would injuriously affect his 
standing in the minds of individuals in this city ; that his talents 
were overrated ; that he could not preach six times acceptably 
to an intelligent congregation. About the Presbytery as a 
body, he said their doings had been piratical i they had acted 
like a set of pirates and scoundrels, and other opprobrious 
epithets. 

Ques, 5. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp state, 
since his return from the Presbytery in October 1831, that 
the differences between him and that body were entirely 
settled ? 

Ans. Yes, I have heard Mr. Clapp say that the difficulties 
were agreeably and satisfactorily settled. He stated also 
that he left his creed with the Presbytery, and they were satis- 
fied with it. 

Ques^ 6* Did the witness or did she not hear the accused 



199 



state that he had not used the name of Mrs. Hearsey of Mrs, 
Hill in a certain letter directed to Rev. George Potts ? 

Ans. He did not say that he had not used Mrs. Hearsey's 
name in it, but said he had not spoken disrespectfully of her 
in that letter. 

CROSS EXAMINED BY MR. CLAPP. 

Ques. 1. Does the witness not remember, that during our pri- 
vate conversations I insisted on the duty of intercessory pray- 
er, but denied that we knew in what way it was efficacious? 

Ans. You said it was right to pray and pour out our souls 
before God ; but you left the impression upon my mind that it 
was not efficacious except to the persons praying. 

Ques. 2. Do you not remember during the time you sat 
under my ministry, that I was in the habit of offering inter- 
cessory prayer in public ? 

Ans. I do. 

Ques. 3. Has not the witness often heard me insist on the 
importance of the christian sabbath, and regret the profana-- 
tion of it in this city ? 

Ans. I have heard you regret the profanation of it in this city„ 

Ques. 4. Do you remember, in my conversation with you 
after my return from Port Gibson, that I stated there was a 
Committee of investigation appointed ? 

Ans. Yes, you stated there was such a Committee appoint- 
ed, and that, too, at your own request ; but at the same time 
your communication of the fact of the appointment of said 
Committee did not interfere with the impression that the 
whole affair was satisfactorily settled. 

Ques. 5. Does the witness remember hearing me say that 
I had no doubt the Presbytery thought they were doing their 
duty with respect to their proceedings with me ? 

Ans. I more distinctly recollect you said you did not im- 
peach their motives. 

Ques. 6. Do you believe that during any time of my resi- 
dence in this city there has been a general rumour here that 
I am a slanderer and a liar? 

Ans. I do not know what the general impression ever has 
been, but I have heard some individuals say so. 



200 



Ques. I. by Mr. Blair. When Mr. Clapp said that the Com- 
mittee was appointed at his own request, did his manner of 
speaking intimate that no Committee would otherwise have 
been appointed? 

Jlns. I understood it was a matter of form more than other- 
wise, as the whole affair had been satisfactorily settled. 

Ques. 2. Did the accused say any thing about a Committee 
of prosecution having been appointed, and afterwards changed 
to a Committee of investigation ? 

Ans. I do not recollect that he did. 

Ques. by the moderator. Have you any other information 
to communicate either for or against the accused ? 

Jlns. Mr. Clapp said, in relation to our doings towards Uni- 
tarians, that we ought to go on the supposition that Unitari- 
ans may be right, and Trinitarians may be wrong ; that there 
was a very important text in favour of Unitarians that ne- 
ver had been answered. He has said though, that the pre- 
ponderance of evidence from Scripture was in favour of the 
divinity of Christ. I inquired how he accounted for the fact 
that intelligent persons were Unitarians when the preponde- 
rance of Scripture was against it ; and asked him if he did 
not think the error was more in the heart than the head ? He 
said if I read their works I should not feel so uncharitable to- 
wards them. He advised me to read Dr. Channing's works, 
and said there were pious persons among Unitarians. I have 
also heard Mr. Clapp speak against creeds and confessions 
in the pulpit, but do not recollect any thing definite upon the 
subject. I heard Mr. Clapp say in a sermon that there was 
too much stress laid upon the death of Christ in preaching, 
and too little upon his example. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in presence 
of the parties and approved, and the witness discharged. 

On motion, resolved, that we adjourn to meet at the Bap- 
tist church to-morrow morning at half past 8 o'clock. 

Nezo Orleans, Wednesday, May 9th, 1832. 
Hon. Samuel H. Harper appeared, and offered the follow- 
ing additional testimony in answer to the 



20 i 



Ques. 1. by the Committee. Will the witness please to relatd 
what he has heard M. Clapp state respecting explanations ac- 
companying his signature to the questions propounded to him 
at Port Gibson, and now in printed extracts, pages 60 & 61 
of Extract of Minutes of the Mississippi Presbytery % 

Ans. After Mr. Clapp's return from the Presbytery in the 
autumn of 1831 he called on witness, and appeared to be 
much pleased with his reception by the members of the Pres- 
bytery generally. To a question by witness, whether he had 
made any concessions to that body ? he replied in substance, 
that he had requested leave to withdraw a certain letter ad- 
dressed to them, on the ground of its having been hastily 
written, and contained one or two points which he wished to 
change ; that he immediately addressed another to the body, 
in which he maintained all his former opinions on doctrine, ex- 
cept in one or two particulars, as that letter would show i 
and that he had preached before the members of the Presby- 
tery some of his most liberal sermons, as previously delivered 
in New Orleans. A few days after this conversation, witness 
was told by a gentleman of this city that he had a letter from 
a member of the Presbytery stating that Mr. Clapp had sub- 
scribed his name to all the Calvinistic dogmas as compre- 
hended in what is called " Calvin's Five Points." On wit- 
ness mentioning this to Mr. Clapp, he repeated the substance 
of the above recited conversation, and added, that in sub- 
scribing to certain articles of faith, he had done so accompa- 
nied with explanations. After the publication of the pam- 
phlet or printed extracts alluded to in the interrogatory, he 
complained to witness of the injustice of publishing to the 
world the questions with his signature appended thereto to be 
found at pages 60 & 61 of said extracts, without accompa- 
nying them with the explanations which he re-affirmed he 
had made at the time. The language imputed to Mr. Clapp 
in the foregoing answer is not to be understood as his verba-- 
tim, but as conveying his ideas or remarks as understood by 
witness. 

Ques. 2. Will witness state whether he has or has not heard 
Mr. Clapp say the statements in the pastoral letter sent by 



202 



the Presbytery to the first Presbyterian church in New Or- 
leans were false in detail and in toto ? 

Ans. I was present when the pastoral letter was read, and 
I understood Mr. Clapp at the time to object to certain parts 
of it as being incorrect. 

CROSS EXAMINED BY MR. CLAPP. 

Ques. 1. Does judge Harper remember that I stated to him 
that I conceived the doctrines to which I subscribed at the 
meeting at Port Gibson as Arminianism, with the exception 
of the doctrine of the final perseverance of saints ? 

Ans. Mr. Clapp, in a conversation previous to my seeing 
the printed extracts, informed me so. The impression left 
upon my mind was, that Mr. Clapp considered himself as op- 
posed by the Presbytery more as matter of form than from a 
belief that his views, to wit, Mr. Clapp's, differed from a great 
many ministers in the Presbyterian church. 

Ques. 2. Is the witness able to state that the following is a 
fair sample of what he has heard me preach upon the subject 
of Election, viz. " I believe that all God's acts are in entire 
" harmony with his purposes ; that he will save finally just as 
" many as he originally intended to save cannot be doubted. 
" I further believe that God will save as many as he can save ; 
" and that all will not be saved, because their salvation is an 
" impossibility ; I mean a moral impossibility, not physical. 
" You may inquire, why God could not as easily save all as a 
" part 1 I answer, that I do not know, Revelation does not ex- 
" plain the reason. But it seems to me the perfections of De- 
"ity demand that he should save as many as possible, as the 
" character of a pious man requires that he should do as much 
"good as possible and no evil. The fact simprythat God will 
" not save all shows that there is some insuperable obstacle in 
" the way. To me it is shocking to say that God sends a part 
" of mankind to hell, when he might with perfect ease, and 
" without encroaching on or sullying his perfections, have qua- 
" lifted them for heaven. If sin and misery are an evil, mast 



203 



"not God do all he can to destroy them ?" Is this, as you 
conceive, a fair sample of my preaching upon this subject ? 
Am, Yes, for several years past. 

Ques. 3. Does not the witness recollect, that after the meet* 
ing at Port Gibson I stated to him in conversation that there 
was a Committee of investigation appointed ? 

Am. Mr. Clapp stated to me that such Committee had 
been appointed, but for what specific purpose witness does 
not now recollect. 

Ques. 4. Does Judge Harper remember to have heard me 
say that I believed the Mississippi Presbytery thought they 
were doing their duty in respect to their proceedings with 
me? 

Am. In repeated conversations with Mr. Clapp upon this 
vexatious subject, he has generally concluded by remarking, 
after stating his grievances, that he imputed no bad motives 
to the Presbytery, but he believed they thought they were 
doing right. 

Ques. 5. Does witness remember that, after a conversation 
in his presence between Mr. Donan and myself on the sub- 
ject of the interrogations in the printed extracts, he remarked 
to me that the concessions of Mr. Donan satisfied his mind 
that I had represented the truth on that subject ? 

Am. I stated that from that interview my mind had re- 
ceived a very different impression on that subject. And I 
farther stated to Mr. Clapp that the admissions of Mr. Donan 
in that matter I thought operated in his favour. 

Ques. 6. Does Judge Harper remember that he expressed 
to me the opinion that, under all the circumstances, the com- 
munications made by me to the Committee at Port Gibson 
should in justice be considered as made to the Presbytery ? 

Am. In consequence of a conversation then recently had 
between Mr. Clapp and Mr. Donan in presence of the wit- 
ness, I expressed the opinion that any communication made 
to the Committee ought in justice to be considered as having 
been made to the Presbytery. This opinion was formed from 
a previous acquaintance with deliberative political bodies, in 
which, when Committees are appointed to report upon any 



204 



particular subject, if they do their duty, the body appointing 
them are entitled to their report. 

Ques. 7. Does Judge Harper remember having heard me 
inculcate the importance of the Christian sabbath, and regret 
its profanation in this city ? 

Ans. Repeatedly. 

Ques. 8. Can Judge Harper say that, during the time he sat 
under my preaching, it was my custom to offer intercessory 
petitions for all mankind ? 

Ans. I have always considered Mr. Clapp as offering up 
his prayers in the same way that I have heard other clergy- 
men do, such as praying for the church and country, &c. 

Ques. 9. I would inquire of Judge Harper whether he be- 
Sieves that at any time during my residence in this city there 
has been a general rumour here, accompanied with strong 
presumption of truth, that I am a slanderer and liar ? 

Ans. There has recently been a good deal of rumour about 
that ; accusations of that kind I heard a long time ago, to wit, 
at the period when a Mr. Bebee resided in this city. 

Ques. 10. Can Judge Harper, from his personal knowledge 
of me, say he has reason to regard me not as a man of vera- 
city? 

Ans. I know of no particular fact in my intercourse with 
Mr. Clapp, so far as relates to me, that should induce me to 
believe that he is not a man of veracity. I would also add, 
that in some particular instances I have thought Mr. Clapp 
made contradictory statements in relation to certain matters, 
but which I always attributed to a want of memory rather 
than a deliberate intention of stating what was not true, to 
which all men are liable. 

Ques. L by Mr. Blair. Did Mr. Clapp state to Judge 
Harper that the written explanations to the first set of ques- 
tions would materially change the meaning of his answers to 
the printed questions had they been given ? 

Ans. Yes. 

Ques. % by Mr. B. In political deliberative bodies, when 
a Committee have commenced giving their report, if the 



205 



body consider it incomplete, may they not have leave to with- 
draw and finish it before it be presented ? 

Ans. My impression is that the course that would be pur- 
sued in a case of that kind, would be for the Committee to ask 
leave to complete there report. 

Ques. by Mr. Clapp, by permission. Does the witness 
recollect to have heard me state that all churches should 
adopt the Apostolic creed ? 

Ans. I have heard Mr. Clapp express the opinion, that in- 
asmuch as he preferred creeds that were inspired to those of 
mere human composition, that all churches should adopt the 
Apostolic creed. 

Ques. by moderator. Does the witness recollect any thing 
farther, either for or against the accused ? 

Ans. I do not recollect any thing farther at this time. 

The above testimony, together with that offered by the wit- 
ness yesterday, was read to him in presence of the parties, and 
approved, and the witness discharged. 

On motion, resolved that we have a recess until 4 o'clock, 
P. M. 

4 o'clock, P. M. 
Mr. Thomas Smith was introduced by the Committee of 
prosecution, and being duly sworn, testified as follows : 

Ques. 1. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp de- 
clare that intercessory prayer was of no avail except to the 
persons praying ? 

Ans. I have heard him say in substance that it did no one 
good but the person exercised in praying ; it did him good by 
calling into exercise proper feelings. He said it did no good 
to a person on the other side of the world. 

Ques. 2. Has the witness or has he not, since April 1830, 
heard the accused make use of slanderous statements in re- 
lation to sundry brethren in the ministry ? 

Ans. At the second meeting that was held for the purpose 
of reading the pastoral letter, Mr. Clapp, holding that letter in 



206 



his hand, after reading several parts of it, declared it was false 
in detail and in toto. 

CROSS EXAMINED BY MR. CLAPP. 

Ques. L I would inquire of the witness, whether he heard 
me advance the sentiment on intercessory prayer in the ses- 
sion room or in the pulpit ? 

Ans. It was in the session room. It was not at the Bible 
class, but at one of the evening meetings of the week., 

Ques. 2. Did the witness understand me at the time as 
avowing or teaching that it is not a duty to offer intercessory 
prayer ? 

Ans. I did not understand him as teaching that it was not 
a duty to offer intercessory prayer, but simply as correcting 
our notions on the subject. 

Ques. 3. Does witness remember my advocating the duty 
of praying for others, either in the session room or in the 
pulpit 1 

Ans. I recollect to have heard him say,, in preaching on 
the subject of forgiveness, that it was our duty to pray for 
our enemies, but I do not recollect at what particular time he 
said it. 

Ques. 4. Does the witness remember that, upon those oc- 
casions when he has united with the accused in prayer either 
in the session room or in the church, that the accused usually 
offered petitions for all mankind ? 

Ans. I do not remember distinctly, but have no doubt of it 
at all. 

Ques. 5. Does the witness remember, at the second meet- 
ing of the church members with regard to the pastoral let- 
ter, whether I used the language " false in detail and in toto" 
w T ith reference to the whole letter, or only those parts that I 
animadverted on I 

Ans. Only parts of the letter were read, and I had not read 
any of it ; I understood that language to relate to the whole. 
I could not understand any thing else by the language. 

Ques. h by Mr. Blair. Does or does not the witness re- 



207 



member to have heard Mr. Clapp teach that there is no pre- 
cept in the Old or New Testament requiring Christians to 
keep the sabbath holy ? 

Ans. I could not answer in the affirmative. At a Bible class, 
in the course of the evening the question was asked Mr. Clapp 
what we should say to our Sunday School children ; whether 
we should teach them the fourth command and insist upon 
its being binding, and upon the ground of that command urge 
them to keep the sabbath holy ? His reply was, No : be 
honest. He said also the same evening, there was no connec- 
tion between the Jewish sabbath and the Christian sabbath. 

Ques. 1. by Mr. Clapp. Does witness recollect having 
heard me on any occasion inculcate the importance of the 
Christian sabbath, and regret its profanation in this city ? 

Ans. Yes. 

Ques. 2. How long since witness ceased to sit under my 
preaching as a regular attendant, and has he heard me preach 
since that time ? 

Ans. Since the month of June 1830. I have heard you 
preach more than twice since that, but not as a regular at- 
tendant. 

Ques. by the moderator. Do you recollect any further 
testimony which you have to offer either for or against Mr, 
Clapp on the subject of these charges ? 

Ans. I do not recollect any thing further distinctly enough 
to offer. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in the pre- 
sence of the parties, and approved, and the witness discharg- 
ed. 

Rev. S. H. Hazard stated, that on further reflection he had 
other testimony to offer, which he omitted to state in its pro- 
per place because he did not at that time perceive its bear- 
ing upon the case, and further deposed in presence of the 
parties as follows : 

That he wished to have appended to his answer to ques- 
tion 3rd, proposed to him by the Committee of prosecution, 
these words, viz. " He had also stated to me that I knew 



208 



more of him than any man living." And also, to his answer 
to question 4th, by the same Committee, these words, viz. 
" These remarks were made to me in confidence by Mr. 
Clapp ;" which was accordingly done, and the record ap- 
proved. 

Thursday, New Orleans, May 1832. 
L. J. Robbins was introduced by the Committee of prose- 
cution, and being duly sworn, testified as follows. 

Ques. 1. Has the witness or has he not heard the accused 
deny the perpetual obligation of the Christian sabbath ? 

Ans. In answer to this, witness said he would prefer to 
hand in his written statement, which embraced the principal 
of the testimony he had to offer, which is as follows, viz. 
" With regard to the letter written by Rev. T. Clapp to the 
" Rev. George Potts, (viz. a letter during the past summer, an 
" extract of which was sent by said Potts to Mr. H. Farrie 
" sen.) in which he spoke disrespectfully of Mrs. Hearsey and 
u other members of the church, I do declare that afterwards, in 
" the house of Mrs. Hearsey, he positively denied having used 
" her name in such a manner in that letter, solemnly appealing 
" to God for the truth of what he declared, and saying, Do you 
" think me a very devil to speak so disrespectfully of one who 
" has been my best friend ? That on one occasion, in the Bible 
" class, I heard him advance the sentiment that we were not 
" now under the obligation to observe any particular day in 
" seven as a holy day, but that one day w r as necessary to be 
(i kept ; that it was left entirely to every man's conscience ; 
" that if a man thought it was right to keep his store open on 
" that day, it would be right so to do. That on one occasion he 
" said with regard to Rev. George Potts, that he knew enough 
" about him to ruin his character. That he has repeatedly 
" advanced the sentiment, that a belief in the divinity of the 
" Saviour was not essential to salvation. That on another oc- 
" casion, in speaking of the death of a particular acquaintance 
" of his own, who was a professed Universalist, that is, did not 
" believe in future punishment, who was considered a moral 



209 



" man on wordly principles, in mentioning him he expressed 
" the utmost confidence that he had gone to heaven. 

(Signed) " LUKE JONES ROBBINS." 

CROSS EXAMINED BY MR. CLAPP. 

Ques. 2. Does the witness remember when and where the 
conversation about Mr. Potts' letter occurred with me ? 

Arts. In Mrs. Hearsey's house in Canal street, shortly after 
your return from the Presbytery last fall. 

Ques. 3. Does witness remember my admitting in that con- 
versation I had used Mrs. Hearsey's name in that letter as 
identified with an opposition which originated in iniquity, but 
that I did not intend to intimate that it was her personal ini- 
quity ? 

Ans. There were two conversations, perhaps f of an hour 
intervened between them. In the first conversation you said 
nothing about it. In the last you stated to that effect, that 
you did not have reference to her ; you did not mean to inti- 
mate that she had been guilty of immoral conduct, but that 
she had been influenced by others. 

Ques. 4. Does witness remember that I said in that conver- 
sation that I had always believed Mrs. Hearsey to be a good 
woman, and that I ardently desired to be on terms of chris- 
tian communion with her ? 

Ans. You did during that visit, but I cannot say whether it 
was in the first or last conversation. 

Ques. 5. When and where did witness hear me say that I 
could ruin Mr. Potts' character ? 

Ans. It was at my house in Bourbon street that I heard 
you say that you knew enough about Mr. Potts to ruin his 
character. The time was just before the Rev. Mr. Aikman 
came to this city. 

Ques. 6. Is the witness positive as to the language I employ- 
ed, whether I said I knew enough to ruin his character or to 
injure it ? 

Ans. To the best of my ^recollection the expression was, 



210 



" knew enough to ruin his character." I would not be posi- 
tive, but that was the substance of it. 

Ques. 7. Does the witness recollect ever to have heard me, 
either in public or private, inculcate the importance of the 
Christian sabbath, and regret its profanation in this city ? 

Ans. I have heard it done in the pulpit, but yet I have heard 
him in the session room say what I have stated in my written 
testimony. 

Ques. 8. Does witness recollect the name of the individual, 
the honest Universalist, with respect to whom I said I believed 
he had gone to heaven ? 

Ans. You said he was a particular friend of yours, a good 
moral man upon worldly principles, a good husband, kind 
friend, &c. but yet could not, or would not, believe in future 
punishment though one rose from the dead. That was your 
remark in substance. 

Ques. 9. Has not witness often heard me avow and teach 
the doctrine of the supreme divinity of the Son of God ? 

Ans. Yes, I have heard you preach that doctrine often, 
though I have heard you say that a belief in the divinity of 
Christ was not necessary to salvation. I have also heard you 
say that a Unitarian could be a good Christian. 

Ques. 10. Does witness remember what I said immediately 
on my return from the Presbytery at Port Gibson respecting 
the manner in which the Mississippi Presbytery treated me ? 

Ans. I cannot recollect definitely ; you said they were upon 
friendly terms with you. 

Ques. 11. by Mr. Hazard. Has the witness heard Mr. Clapp 
inculcate the importance of keeping the sabbath, and lament 
its profanation in this city since the discussion took place in 
the Bible class ? 

Ans. I have not attended his preaching since, and of course 
could not have heard him. 

Ques. by the moderator. Has the witness any thing further 
to state, either for or against the accused ? 

Ans. I have nothing further to state that I recollect. 

Ques. by Mr. Clapp, by permission. Can witness say who 



211 



was present in his house in Bourbon street when I said I knew 
enough about Mr. Potts to ruin his character? 

Ans. Mrs. Robbins was present at the time, and no other 
one. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in presence 
of the parties, and approved, and the witness discharged. 

At the request of the accused and Committee of prosecu- 
tion, Resolved, that the following Commission be appointed, 
consisting of the Moderator, Rev. B. Chase, and Rev. S. H. 
Hazard, to take the testimony of Mrs. D. A. Hearsey, at her 
house, on the part of the prosecution ; and of Madams South- 
mayd, Ball, Goodrich, Davis, Heaup, Allison, Baldwin, Smith, 
Bein, Leverich, Lake, J. Hearsey, Went, Jourdan, Miss Leeds, 
and Miss Williford, on the part of the accused ; and the tes- 
timony, or as much of it as shall be thus taken, shall be after- 
wards read to the Presbytery. It shall also be the duty of the 
Commission to report from time to time to the Presbytery. 

The moderator gave notice from the chair to the accused, 
that the Commission of the Presbytery will proceed to take 
the testimony of Mrs. D. A. Hearsey at her house, at 4 o'clock 
this afternoon. 

Friday, New Orleans, May Wth, 1832. 
Minutes of the last session were read, and also the report 
of the Commission of Presbytery, which is as follows : viz. 

May 10th, 1832, Mrs. Hearsey 9 s, Canal street, 
4 o'clock, P. M. 
Mrs. D. A. Hearsey was introduced by the Committee of 
prosecution, and being duly sworn, testified as follows : 

Ques. 1. Does the witness or does she not know any thing 
about a certain letter, written by the accused to the Rev. 
George Potts of Natchez, in which it is said disrespectful 
mention of her name, and that of others, was made ? And if 
she know any thing, she will please to state what. 

Ans. I saw an extract of the letter, and afterwards heard 
part of it. read. 

29 



212 



Ques. 2. Did witness or did she not hear the accused deny 
making mention of her name disrespectfully in said letter ? 

Ans. Yes, he did deny that he had mentioned my name 
disrespectfully, and declared, in the presence of heaven, in a, 
very solemn manner, that he had not used my name disre- 
spectfully. I was very much surprised at it when I saw the 
extract from the letter a few days after. At that time I knew 
nothing of the letter, nor until a few days afterwards. 

Ques. 3. Will the witness please to state the time, as near 
as she can, of the above denial ? 

Ans. A few days after his return from the meeting of the 
Mississippi Presbytery, in October last. 

Ques. 4. Will witness please to state if any one was pre- 
sent at the time of said denial ? 

Ans. My son-in-law Mr. L. J. Robbins, and my daughter 
Mrs. Robbins, were passing through the room, back and forth ; 
but whether they heard his statements or not, I do not know. 

Ques. 5. Had witness or had she not had any disagreement 
previously to this conversation with the accused ? 

Ans. No other disagreement than leaving the church. 

Ques. 6. Had Mr. Farrie or had he not endeavoured to in- 
fluence witness to make opposition to the accused ? 

Ans. So far from Mr. Fame's having influenced me, he 
never mentioned Mr. Clapp's name to me that I recollect, or 
spoke to me of church grievances. 

Ques. 7. Is witness conscious of Mr. Ross having used his 
influence to induce her to make opposition to the accused ? 

Ans. I believe it was Mr. Ross's intention to influence my 
mind. He called at my house one day to say something re- 
specting Mr. Clapp soon after his difficulty with him, and 
began to speak upon the subject, and I beckoned to him to 
leave the room ; and then told him, whatever he had to say 
against Mr. Clapp, had better be said in presence of the mem- 
bers of the church. He immediately went away, and I have 
no recollection of ever having any other conversation with 
him respecting it. Neither Mr. Ross nor any one else has 
had any influence upon my mind. 

Ques. 8. Is Mrs. Hearsey conscious of having made any 



213 



opposition to Mr. Clapp other than that arising from a dis- 
satisfaction with his doctrinal views 1 

Ans. Mr. Clapp stated in a letter, that he would as soon 
exchange pulpits with a Unitarian as any other. I told him 
I could not sit under the preaching of a Unitarian minister. 
I accordingly left his church, and am not conscious of having 
made any other opposition to him. I also stated to him, as a 
farther reason for leaving his church, that I wished to live in 
peace in the church, and that there had been disturbance in 
his church for several years. 

Ques. 9. Has witness heard the accused state, since his re- 
turn from the Presbytery at Port Gibson in October 1831, that 
the differences between him and that body were entirely set- 
tled? 

Ans. Yes. 

Ques. 10. Has witness or has she not heard the accused 
deny the efficacy of intercessory prayer ? 

Ans. I have not ; I have heard others say that he did, but 
I stated to them that 1 did not believe it, and to the best of 
my knowledge have never heard him say it. At the time Mr. 
Clapp was said to have denied the efficacy of intercessory 
prayer, I was at the West and did not hear it. 

Ques. 11. Will witness please to state what effect the Rev. 
Mr. Clapp's preaching had on her mind previously to her 
leaving the church 1 

Ans. It had the effect to lessen the importance of vital re- 
ligion. 

CROSS EXAMINED BY MR. CLAPP. 

Ques. 1. Does witness remember, that during the conversa- 
tion with the accused in this house, shortly after his return 
from the Presbytery at Port Gibson, that he admitted the fact 
of having used her name in the letter to the Rev. George 
Potts as connected with the opposition here, which he believ- 
ed had originated in inquity, but denied that he intended to 
intimate that she had any personal share in it ? 



214 



Ans. To the best of my recollection you did not. I heard that 
you had made such an explanation to others, but you did not 
make it to me ; I partly believed it until I saw Mr. Potts. 

Ques. by the moderator. Has witness any further testimo- 
ny to offer respecting the charges against Mr. Clapp ? 

Ans. I have nothing further to state that I recollect. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in presence 
of the parties, and approved, and the witness discharged. 

BENJAMIN CHASE, 
Clerk of the Commission of the Presbytery. 

Mr. W. W. Caldwell was introduced by the Committee of 
prosecution, and being duly sworn, testified as follows : 

Ques. 1. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp deny 
the doctrine of original sin ? 

Ans. He stated in the pulpit that children were born pure, 
as pure as a sheet of white paper ; that God never made any 
thing that was not pure. The next day, as I think, in private 
conversation, I asked him if he did not think the atonement 
of Christ was necessary for the salvation of children ? He 
said he did. I told him that I regretted he had not advanced 
that idea yesterday in the pulpit in connection with what he 
then said. The next sabbath, perhaps, he said, if we sinned 
in Adam's loins, of what prodigious dimensions must they 
have been. I have also heard him say that the consequences 
of Adam's sin might be illustrated in this way ; — -if a person 
should make a breach in the Lever and deluge the city, the 
guilt would be his, while the misery would extend to all the 
inhabitants of the city. 

Ques. 2. Have you or have you not heard Mr. Clapp de- 
nounce the Confession of Faith of the Presbyterian church ? 

Ans. Yeg ; I heard him denounce all Creeds and Confes- 
sions. 1 do not remember that I heard him denounce the 
Creed of the Presbyterian church particularly, but express 
the wish that all creeds were burnt. 



215 



Ques. 3. Did you or did you not hear him deny that a be- 
lief in the divinity of Christ was essential to salvation ? 

Ans, I have heard him say that a belief in the divinity of 
Christ was not essential to salvation. I would also state, that 
I heard him say a deist might be saved if sincere in his belief. 
This was in the pulpit. 

Ques. 4. Have you or have you not heard him speak in re- 
lation to the Christian sabbath in such a way as to leave the 
impression that he did not think it of much importance to 
keep it holy ? 

Arts. In the Bible class, in the session room, he expressed 
his views more fully than I had heard him before. I asked 
him if we should not teach the Sunday School children the 
fourth commandment ? He replied, no, be honest ; that re- 
ferred to the Jewish sabbath : and said that there was no 
proof in the New Testament, except from inference, such 
as the Apostles meeting on the first day of the week, that we 
should observe it. He said also, that the Apostles attended to 
their secular affairs on that day as on others. He said also 
that experience showed the utility of observing it. The ef- 
fect of these remarks, in the opinion of witness, was perni- 
cious. 

Ques. 5. Have you or have you not heard him declare that 
intercessory prayer was of no avail except to the person 
praying ? 

Ans. Yes, I have heard him say it from the pulpit. He 
said that our prayers could not benefit others at a distance, 
but if asked why do we pray for the heathen, his reply was, 
that we ourselves are benefitted by exciting in us feelings of 
benevolence for others, which was a good feeling, he said ? 

Ques. 6. Has witness heard the accused make slanderous 
or unchristian statements in relation to sundry professors of 
religion in the city of New Orleans since April 1830 ? 

Ans. I cannot specify any particular case that I recollect. 
In the season of 1830 and 1831, he preached very much against 
professors of religion ; for example, " they might come to 
" church ; attend Sabbath School ; look very demure; but they 
" were not so good as many non-professors who were out of 



216 



**the church ; that the doors of the church were so narrowed 
" by bigots that it was made too difficult to enter, and many 
f< were kept out who ought to have been in the church." He 
stated also, in relation to receiving members in the church, 
that the only question which should be asked, was, " do you * 
believe in the Lord Jesus Christ ?" If they answered yes, and 
promised to lead a moral life, that was sufficient. 

Ques. 7. Will witness say what slanderous and unchristian 
statements, if any, he has heard the accused make against his 
brethren in the ministry of the Presbytery since April 1830 ? 

Arts, I have heard him in conversation ridicule the proceed- 
ings of the Presbytery in relation to his dismission and the 
pastoral letter, and say it was written by the younger mem- 
bers of the Presbytery, who were not acquainted with the 
facts in the case ; that the Presbytery had acted like a set of 
jackasses in the case. That expression was made to me in 
private, under considerable excitement ; and I did not really 
think it was his deliberate opinion, at least I hoped it was not. 

Ques. 8. Did witness or did he not hear the accused, after 
his return from the Presbytery at Port Gibson in October 1831, 
state that the differences between him and that body were 
entirely settled? 

Ans. Yes ; I met Mr. Clapp soon after his return from that 
meeting, and he told me the difficulties were entirely settled. 
I remarked, we had no communications from the Presbytery, 
and we did not know. He said it was settled forever ; that 
he had a certificate of ordination in his pocket, and that set- 
tled the question about his being the pastor of the church in 
New Orleans. He spoke of the kindness of his treatment by 
the members of the Presbytery at Port Gibson, and gave me 
to understand that the difficulties with the Presbytery were 
all adjusted. 

Ques. 9. Has witness heard the accused state that the pas- 
toral letter to the first Presbyterian church in New Orleans 
was false in detail and in toto 1 

Ans. Yes ; he made that assertion in substance, if not in 
those words, in the session room, after he heard the letter read 



217 



for the first time. He appeared to make the remark under 
feelings of excitement. 

Mr. Clapp declined cross examining the witness. 

Ques. by the moderator. Does witness recollect any fur- 
ther testimony either for or against the accused ? 

Ans. I have heard Mr. Clapp say, that rather than preach 
the old Calvinistic doctrines as they were taught in New 
England, he would preach the doctrines of Fanny Wright. 
He made this remark, I think, with particular reference to the 
doctrine of election. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in the pre- 
sence of the parties, and approved, and the witness discharged. 

The Committee of prosecution, with permission of the ac- 
cused, introduced Stephen Franklin without a legal citation 
to give testimony in the case under the second charge, who, 
being duly sworn, testified as follows : 

Ques. 1. Will witness please to state whether he has or has 
not heard the accused state what was the object of the Mis- 
sissippi Presbytery or its members in coming to New Orleans 
in January 1831 ? And if he has, please to state that ob- 
ject. 

Jlns. I was in Mr. Maybin's office, just previous to the 
meeting of the Presbytery in 1831 ; Mr. Clapp was there, 
and Mr. Maybin, and Rev. Mr. Winslow. Mr. Clapp, in 
speaking of the proceedings of the Presbytery towards him, 
said they were rascally and villanous. He used very harsh 
language ; I think the terms he used were more expressive 
than those I have stated taking them altogether. Speaking 
of the meeting just at hand the members of the Presbytery 
were coming down to attend, he said that they were coming 
to lay a plot against him, but that this community was too 
wise for them ; there was too much light here, no chance 
for them to plot successfully. Mr. Clapp said also at the 
same time that he had no malice or ill-will towards them. He 



218 



spoke this apparently under excitement, as he usually has ap- 
peared to me when speaking on that subject. 

Mr. Clapp declined asking witness any questions by way 
of cross examination. 

Ques. by the moderator. Does witness recollect any further 
testimony either for or against the accused in relation to the 
charges brought against him ? 

Ans. I met Mr. Clapp shortly after the last meeting of the 
Presbytery at Carmel, and something was said respecting 
signing the interrogatories contained in the printed minutes ; 
he said Mr. Chase had been representing about town that he 
signed them without giving explanations ; a bigger lie, he said, 
never was told. Subsequently he said Mr. Chase must have 
been mistaken. I heard Mr. Clapp say, previous to the pub- 
lication of the printed extracts, that the Presbytery would 
publish exparte statements. I have also heard Mr. Clapp 
say since the publication of those minutes, that the Presbyte- 
ry had published exparte statements. I heard Mr. Clapp ac- 
cuse the Presbytery, or Committee, I do not recollect which, 
with dishonesty, in requiring him to sign the last interrogato- 
ries without explanations. I have heard Mr. Clapp say that 
Mr. Donan acknowledged at Judge Harper's that he signed 
the questions at the Presbytery with explanations. I have 
heard Mr. Clapp accuse Mrs. Hearsey of " fibbing ;" some 
others were mentioned with her, but who I do not recollect, 
I have also heard Mr. Clapp speak of Mrs. Hearsey in terms 
of respect. I have heard Mr. Clapp say respecting the 
charges of falsehood brought against him, that the falsehoods, 
if there were any, were on the part of the Presbytery. I have 
heard Mr. Clapp accuse Mr. Potts of suppressing facts or 
communications which were in his favour. I have heard Mr. 
Clapp frequently speak of the members of the Presbytery 
with respect, and say, in relation to their proceedings with 
him, he had no doubt they thought they were doing their 
duty. Mr. Clapp has told me that there were two sets of 
questions ; that the first set were signed by him at large, or 



219 



with explanations ; that some of the members of the Presby- 
tery were dissatisfied with those explanations, because they 
were not expressed in the technical language of Calvinism ; 
and that consequently another set was proposed to him, to 
which he was to sign his name definitely, yes or no. He re- 
marked, that he told Mr. Donan that they were either honest 
or dishonest; I Understood the remark to refer to the time 
when the questions were proposed, but may have been mis- 
taken as to the time. He said, moreover, that the result had 
proved that they were dishonest in their intentions. I heard 
Mr. Clapp say that the Presbytery did not expect to prove 
their charges against him ; that they thought him a bold, in- 
dependent fellow, and too indifferent to them ; that he did 
not think enough of them, and they wanted to pull him down, 
and roll him over in the dirt, to show their superiority. He 
said that was the amount of it ; and if they could humble him 
by it, it would be a very good process. This is according to 
the best of my recollection. 

Ques. by the Committee. Were the remarks last mention- 
ed in the foregoing answer made facetiously, or in a serious 
manner ? 

Jlns. Mr. Clapp laughed at the time he made them, but it 
appeared to me to be his intention to charge the Presbytery 
with insincerity. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in presence 
of the parties, and approved, and the witness discharged. 

Rev. John B. Warren was introduced by the accused, and 
being duly sworn, testified as follows : 

Ques. 1. by Mr. Clapp. Will witness state the views he 
has heard me avow and teach on the subject of sin ? 

Jlns. On the subject of original sin, I have often heard him 
express this general sentiment, both in public and private : — 
that, in consequence of Adam's apostacy, all his posterity do 
sin the moment they become capable of moral action, in con- 
sequence of that mysterious connexion which God has been 
pleased to establish between Adam and his posterity. 



220 



Ques. % Will witness state the views he has heard m© 
avow or teach on the subject of the Holy Trinity ? 

Ans. I have heard him reject the term Trinity as an un- 
scriptural word, calculated to give a false impression ; but I 
have never heard him deny the fact of the three-fold distinc- 
tion in the Godhead as contained in the Bible, of Father, Son, 
and Holy Spirit. 

Ques. 3. Will witness state what he has heard me avow or 
teach concerning the decrees of God ? 

Ans. I have heard Mr. Clapp repeatedly express his disap- 
probation of the views advanced by some on that subject. I 
have had frequent conversation with him, and I can say that 
he satisfied my mind that he believes God's purposes extend 
to every thing. The fact, that God's plans extended to every 
thing, I have heard him admit. 

Ques. 4. Will witness state what he has heard me avow 
or teach upon the importance of believing in the divinity of 
Christ? 

Ans. I have never heard him deny the fact of the divinity 
of Christ ; but I have heard him express himself in such a 
_ way as to excite in my mind the fear that he did not attach 
so much importance to that fact as he ought. He has pro- 
fessed, however, to me to regard it as fundamental. I heard 
him preach a sermon upon the distinguishing characteristics 
of the Christian religion, in which he asserted the divinity of 
Christ to be one of the fundamental doctrines of the Christian 
religion. 

Ques. 5. Will witness state what he has heard me avow 
or teach concerning the Christian sabbath ? 

Ans. I have heard him, on the subject of the fourth com- 
mand, say it was applicable to the Jewish sabbath. The 
fact of the obligation to observe the Christian sabbath I have 
heard him assert, and I have heard him urge its obligations as 
divine in a forcible manner. 

Ques. 6. Will witness state what he has heard me avow 
or teach on the subject of intercessory prayer ? 

Ans. I was informed Mr. Clapp had advanced very erro- 
neous sentiments upon the subject, and I inquired of him re- 



221 



specting it. He said he was combatting the idea that was en- 
tertained by some of our good people at the North respecting 
the prayer of faith. I inquired of him if he believed the fact 
that prayer was one of the means through which God be- 
stows his blessings upon us ; he replied, he did. His expla- 
nations to me were always full and satifactory. 

Ques. 7. Had witness ever heard me impeach the motives, 
and assail the Christian character, of any professors of reli- 
gion in this city since April 1830 ? 

Ans. I have no recollection that I have ever heard him 
impeach the motives, I have heard him use harsh and un- 
guarded language about them* 

Ques. 8. Does witness recollect my statement in regard to 
the letter to Rev. George Potts, in which Mrs. Hearsey's 
name is mentioned ? 

Ans. I do not particularly ; I have heard him complain of 
Mr. Potts in respect, but do not recollect particulars. 

Ques. 9. Does witness remember my statement to him 
about the meeting of Port Gibson ? 

Ans. Yes. On my return to New Orleans he informed me 
the difficulties were settled. Before I saw Mr. Clapp, from 
Mr, Butler and others there, I received the impression that 
the difficulties were settled, and that a Committee of investi- 
gation was appointed to smooth over the affair. 

Ques. 10. Does witness remember my statement to him 
about the interrogatories signed at Port Gibson and contained 
in the printed extracts ? 

Ans. I inquired of him why he signed them, how it came 
about. He stated he had signed them with explanations, but 
to whom they were given 1 did not understand. 

Ques. 11. Does witness remember any statements that I 
made on the pastoral letter ? 

Ans, Yes. 

CROSS EXAMINED BY THE COMMITTEE. 

Ques. 12. Witness stated he had been afraid Mr. Clapp 
did not attach sufficient importance to the divinity of Christ $ 
what excited your fear 1 



222 



Am. The kindly manner in which he spoke of Unitarians. 
The standing reason which he had assigned for such a course 
of proceedings towards them, was, that that was the best way 
to reclaim and convert them. 

Ques. 13. Did not the accused deny to the witness the doc- 
trine of the imputation of the sin of our first parents to their 
posterity ? 

Am. If by the imputation of sin is meant the imputation 
of the guilt or ill desert of Adam's act, he denies it ; if by 
the imputation of sin is meant liability to punishment, or the 
consequence of Adam's act, he does not deny it. 

Ques. 14. by Mr. Chase. Did you ever hear Mr. Clapp 
deny that he had adopted the Confession of Faith ? 

Here the accused conceded that he had never denied 
that he adopted the Confession of Faith, but simply denied 
that he had adopted it at the first meeting of Presbytery which 
he attended. 

Ques. 15. by moderator. Do you recollect any further 
testimony that you have to offer, either for or against the ac- 
cused ? 

Am. From the bold and adventurous character of his 
mind and of his investigations, I have had my fears that he 
might fall into dangerous error ; but his solemn and repeated 
declarations have satisfied my mind that such is not yet the 
fact. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in the pre- 
sence of the parties, and approved, and the witness discharg- 
ed. 

On motion, resolved, that in compliance with the request 
of the moderator, the Rev. Wm. C. Blair be appointed chair- 
man of the Commission in his place. 

Resolved, that the names of Mrs. Goodrich and Mrs. Ball 
be added to the names of those whose testimony is to be 
taken by the Commission in behalf of the accused. 

Notice was given to the Judicatory by the accused that he 



223 



should proceed to take the testimony of Mrs. Southmayd and 
Mrs. Goodrich at their house at 4 P. M. ; and also of Mrs. 
Ball and Mrs. Jourdon, No. 23 Magazine street. 

Saturday, Mew Orleans, May 12th, 1832. 

Minutes of last session were read, and also the report of 
the Commission of Prebytery, which is as follows : 

Commission of Presbytery met. According to the notifica- 
tion of the accused, Mrs. Catherine Southmayd was intro- 
duced by the accused, and being duly sworn, testified as fol- 
lows : 

Ques. 1. Does witness remember the views which I have 
avowed or taught on original sin ? 

Ans. I have heard you teach that we are not guilty of 
Adam's sin, but suffer on account of it. You illustrated your 
views on this subject, by saying, " If a person should make a 
" breach in the Lever and inundate the city, the guilt would 
" be his, while the consequences would extend to all the in- 
" habitants of the city." 

Ques. 2. Does witness remember the doctrine I publicly 
taught on the subject of the Trinity ? 

Ans. 1 think I have heard you say you did not believe in 
three distinct powers or agents in the Godhead, but that you 
believed in three facts, and did not object to the language 
God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. You 
thought the word Trinity an unhappy expression, and not 
found in the Scriptures. 

Ques. 3. Does witness remember to have heard me preach 
that, in consequence of Adam's sin, all his posterity became 
sinners as soon as they were capable of sinning ? 

Jins. I think I have heard Mr. Clapp assert, that when w 7 e 
became moral agents we had a tendency to sin, were more 
liable to sin on account of Adam's sin. I have heard Mr. 
Clapp say, that when we are born we are pure, as coming 
immediately from the hands of God. 

Ques. 4. Does witness remember the doctrine I have avow- 
ed or taught upon the subject of the Christian Sabbath ? 



224 



Ans. That, from the example of the Apostles and our Sa- 
viour, it was our duty to observe it. As respects the fourth 
commandment, that related immediately to the Jewish sab- 
bath. As we had no direct command in the New Testament 
to pray in our families, yet the duty is inspired. So in like 
manner, in respect to the Christian sabbath, the duty of keep- 
ing that is inspired. 

Ques. 5. Does the witness remember my statement from 
the pulpit, that the command to worship God in public, found 
in the New Testament, involved an obligation to observe the 
Christian sabbath ? 

Arts. Yes, Sir, I do distinctly. 

Ques. 6. Did you ever hear me deny the efficacy of inter- 
cessory prayer ? 

Jlns. I have heard you say that it was our bounden duty 
to pray for others ; that we had no direct promise that prayer 
for others would be answered in any particular way. If it 
had no other known effect, it would promote piety in our- 
selves, and we need not inquire what effect it would have 
upon others, but observe its effect upon ourselves ; that it did 
not alter the arrangements of Deity ; he had ordained certain 
things, knowing that prayers would be offered to bring them 
about. 

Ques. 7. Has not the witness heard me say that I believed 
the professors of religion in this city, who had left my church, 
thought they were doing their duty ? 

Jins. I have heard him say that they acted conscientiously 
he believed. He also said he thought their leaving proceeded 
from misconception of his views. He said he wished they 
might prosper, that the division had unhappily originated, 
that there was room enough for more churches. 

Ques. 8. Does witness remember what I have taught con- 
cerning the decrees of God ? 

Ans. That by God things were ordained ; that all believers 
were ordained to eternal life, but that their election was not 
made irrespective of their works. That God permitted sin ; 
and that no definite number was ordained, only as that num- 



225 



ber was included in the word believers ; thai God could not 
save without man's concurrence. 

Ques. 9. Did witness ever hear me say of the Mississippi 
Presbytery, that in their proceedings in relation to me, he be- 
lieved they thought they were doing their duty ? 

Jlns. Yes. 

Ques. 10. Does not witness remember conversing with me 
about any letter to Rev. George Potts in which Mrs. Hear- 
sey's name was said to have been used disrespectfully ? 

Ans. I recollect of your conversing with me about that let- 
ter. I recollect of asking you if you wrote that letter, suppos- 
ing you knew to what letter I alluded. You said you did. I 
asked what you meant by iniquity, saying it seemed to me to 
be a strong expression. You replied, that all schism or divi- 
sion originated in iniquity ; meaning by that, evil. 

Ques. 11. Does witness remember of my conversing with 
her about the meeting of the Presbytery at Port Gibson ? 

Jlns. I do not recollect any thing particular about it. 

Ques. 12. Does witness remember hearing me often incul- 
cate the importance of the Christian sabbath, and regret its 
profanation in this city 1 

Arts. Yes I do, more openly than any one I ever heard, 
and particularize many things which were thought by some to 
be too severe. 

Ques. 13. Does witness remember to have heard me preach 
on the reality and importance of revivals of religion ? 

Ans. I recollect hearing you preach on it. I heard you say 
that you heartily wished a thorough revival might take place 
in your church, and that human arrangements were not ne- 
cessary to make the spirit willing to revive his work. 

CROSS EXAMINED BY THE COMMITTEE. 

Qites. 14. Does witness recollect to have heard the accused 
say any thing respecting a pastoral letter which was sent to 
the church in this city ? 

Jlns. 1 heard Mr. Clapp read parts of that letter and say 
that some statements in it were false, and if the Presbytery 



226 



had examined their papers they would have seen it them- 
selves. 

Ques. 15. Have you heard Mr. Clapp speak of his brethren 
of the Mississippi Presbytery in an unchristian manner ? 

Ans. I have not that I know of, though I heard him com- 
plain that it was a breach of confidence in Mr. Potts to show 
some letters, to which he, at the time he made this complaint, 
alluded. 

Ques. 16. Has Mr. Clapp been uniform in his preaching 
upon the same doctrines ? 

Arts. I have not discovered any discrepancy. 

Ques. 17. by the chairman. Has the witness any further 
testimony to offer, either for or against the accused ? 

Jlns. I heard Mr. Clapp say, that to him a belief in the di- 
vinity of Christ was a fundamental doctrine, but he could not 
but believe that conscientious Unitarians, who relied on Christ, 
could be saved. In regard to Deists, I have heard him say 
that an honest Deist might be saved if there was one ; but he 
did not believe there was, for the evidences of Christianity are 
so strong as to convince all honest examiners of its truth. In 
regard to the explanations, I did not hear him say that the 
explanations were written, but that the Presbytery must have 
known how he understood them. He said he could sign the 
Confession of Faith in the same way, being predicated on texts 
of Scripture which he understood differently from the old 
Calvinists. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in the pre- 
sence of the parties, and approved, and the witness discharged. 

Mr. F. R. Southmayd was introduced by the accused, and 
being duly sworn, testified as follows : 

Ques. I. Will witness state the views he has heard me avow 
or teach concerning sin ? 

. Ans. I have always heard Mr. Clapp avow this one doc- 
trine and none other ; viz. That infants, as they came from 
the hand of their Maker, were pure ; that as sin is a voluntary 
transgression of the law of God, they could not be sinners 



227 



until they arrived at that age when they were capable of dis- 
cerning between right and wrong ; that as they did arrive at 
that age, they transgressed the law of God, and thereby be- 
came sinners ; that in consequence of Adam's transgression, 
such was the result in every case. 

Ques. 2. What views has witness heard me avow or teach 
upon the subject of the Holy Spirit ? 

Arts. I have always heard Mr. Clapp avow that there was, 
from all eternity, a reason for the use of the terms, Father, 
Son, and Holy Ghost ; that he thought the use of the term 
*'* three persons" was improper, but that he did believe in a 
Trinity of facts : that in one sense God was our Father; in 
another, God was our Redeemer ; and in another, God was 
our Sanctifier ; and always expressed his unqualified belief in 
the divinity of Jesus Christ. 

Ques. 3. What views has witness heard me avow or teach 
concerning the decrees of God ? 

Ans. That God has so foreordained whatever comes to pass, 
that he is in no wise the author of sin ; but, on the contrary, 
sin is that deadly thing which his soul hateth ; and that in no 
way does he infringe upon man's free agency. 

Ques. 4. What views has witness heard me avow or teach 
in respect to the character of Unitarians ? 

Ans. That he thought it possible that sincere seekers after 
truth, and who arrived at the decision that Jesus Christ was 
in some respects inferior to the Father, and at the same time 
relied upon him for salvation, might be saved ; but that he 
could give no quarter to mere Humanitarians. That in the 
earlier part of witness's acquaintance with Mr. Clapp, he 
heard two or three sermons which led him to fear that Mr. 
Clapp was verging towards Unitarianism, and expressed those 
fears to several of his acquaintances ; that he afterwards had 
several free and long conversations with Mr. Clapp upon this 
subject, the result of which was his entire conviction that Mr. 
Clapp had not departed from the views upon the subject of 
the Trinity which are held by a large portion of the clergy- 
men of the Presbyterian church ; and that since that time his 

31 



228 



confidence in the soundness of Mr. Clapp's theological views 
has remained the same, unshaken. 

Quts. 5. What views has witness heard me avow or teach 
concerning the Christian sabbath ? 

Ans. That the Jewish sabbath, which many consider of 
obligation upon Christians, had been abolished ; that the Chris- 
tian sabbath is not directly commanded in the New Testa- 
ment ; that it was established by the Apostles, and that the 
Lord Jesus Christ had honoured it ; that, as the Apostles were 
divinely inspired, any ordinance which they instituted was of 
binding obligation upon all mankind who were in such circum- 
stances that the obligation could rest upon them, and that 
consequently were bound to keep holy the sabbath or Lord's 
day. Witness has heard Mr. Clapp say, that instead of les- 
sening the obligation to keep holy that day by the views he 
took of the subject, he thought he increased the obligation. 

Qucs. 6. What views has witness heard me avow or teach 
respecting prayer ? 

Ans. That we could not explain how it was that our pray- 
ers brought down blessings upon us, but that we had the as- 
surance of the fact ; and that, although our prayers could not 
alter the determination of God, yet through prayer we were 
taught to expect blessings which we otherwise would not re- 
ceive ; and that we were enjoined to pray for all men. He 
also stated that prayer was the means of promoting holiness 
in our souls. 

Ques. 7. Has witness ever heard me slander members of 
the Mississippi Presbytery since April 1830? 

Ans. Witness has never heard Mr. Clapp impugn the mo- 
tives of the Mississippi Presbytery. Mr. Clapp has said that 
he believed that in all their proceedings in regard to him they 
had been influenced by good motives ; that their desire was 
to promote the glory of God in the welfare of the church ; 
that at the same time they had treated him unjustly, and had 
stated things that were not true ; that at the same time he had 
no idea that they intended to assert things untrue. Mr. Clapp 
has sometimes, in the warmth of conversation, spoken dispa- 
ragingly of the talents of the Presbytery, but never, to the 



229 



knowledge of witness, made any charge against their moral 
character. 

Ques. 8. Has witness heard me slander professors of reli- 
gion who left my church, since April 1830 ? 

Aris. Witness has heard Mr. Clapp say that he believed 
they were honest and good ; that he had never heard him 
charge any one of them with bad motives. At the same time 
he had laughed at some of them, and said that he was astonish- 
ed that they were such ignoramuses as so much to misunder- 
stand and misrepresent him. Mr. Clapp had said that he was 
glad a second church was about to be formed, and that he 
wished it success ; and that he wished also they would esta- 
blish another. Witness has sometimes been displeased with 
the observations of Mr. Clapp, and has very plainly told him 
so, but does not know of any thing that Mr. Clapp has said, 
in regard to any professor of religion in this city, which, under 
all the circumstances, would bring him under the charge of 
want of Christian candour or charity. 

Ques. 9. Does witness remember of conversing with me 
about the letter to the Rev. George Potts, in which Mrs. 
Hearsey's name was mentioned ? 

Ans. Witness does recollect it. Mr. Clapp acknowledged 
having written the letter, never denied that Mrs. Hearsey's 
name and others were mentioned therein ; but did deny that 
a fair construction of the letter would lead any one to believe 
that he charged the said named individual and others with the 
iniquity spoken of in said letter ; and that he was willing, and 
should like to have the whole letter published ; but objected 
to part and parts of it being taken as a fair exhibition of the 
whole. 

Ques. 10. Does witness remember conversing with me 
about the meeting of the Mississippi Presbytery at Port Gib- 
son in October last ? 

Ans. Yes ; the first conversation that I had with Mr. Clapp, 
which was upon the 2lst of November, was upon this subject. 
He then stated that he had made a fair exhibition of his views 
to the Presbytery, and he also preached one of his most hereti- 
cal sermons ; and the members of the Presbytery treated him 



J 



230 

with a great deal of kindness and apparent confidence. That 
it appeared they had found out that he did not differ much 
from their own views of doctrine ; but did not assert that all 
of the difficulties between him and the Presbytery were 
settled, but left the impression upon my mind that the sub- 
ject would undergo a further investigation. Mr. Clapp did 
not state this to witness, it was the decision of his own 
mind from the knowledge of the circumstances. But Mr. 
Clapp did state that he had made a thorough disclosure of his 
views to the Presbytery. In that conversation nothing was 
said of having signed any articles or questions. 

Ques. II. Does witness remember conversing with me con- 
cerning the interrogatories in the printed extracts ? 

Jlns. He does. Mr. Clapp stated that he explained his views 
to the Committee, and witness was of opinion that Mr. Clapp 
stated that those views were given in writing at the time the 
said interrogatories were signed ; that subsequently the Com- 
mittee had stated that they were perfectly satisfied, but that 
some of the older members of the Presbytery preferred to 
have them signed without any qualifications. Mr. Clapp ne- 
ver told witness that the questions which appear in the printed 
minutes were those which he had signed with qualifications. 
This conversation with Mr. Clapp was about two weeks after 
the conversation alluded to in the answer to the previous 
question. 

Ques. 12. Did witness ever hear me talk about the pasto- 
ral letter brought to this city by Mr. Chase ? 

Ans. He has. He stated that the charges made against 
him were false ; and that the Presbytery would find it so if 
they would take the trouble to examine the matter. Mr. 
Clapp did not charge the Presbytery with intentionally as- 
serting any thing false. 

Ques. 13. Did witness ever hear me preach concerning the 
reality and importance of revivals ? 

Jlns. He has 5 and Mr. Clapp always strongly advocated 
them. Mr. Clapp has said that he wished he might have one 
here, and that there was no difficulty in the way of a continual 
revival of religion if Christians would but do their duty. At 



231 



the same time he said, that in the revivals which made so 
much noise at the North, he feared there was much that was 
not religious. He said he did not like to see any humbugging 
about such matters. Witness has always thought Mr. Clapp 
a friend to revivals, though he has differed with him as to the 
means of producing them. 

Ques. 14. How long since witness has heard me preach? 

&ns. I think it is five sabbaths, or about that time. 

Ques. 15. Have not witness and the accused been on terms 
of intimate and unreserved intercourse in times past ? 

Jlns. They have ; witness has sought and found frequent 
opportunities of free and unreserved intercourse with Mr. 
Clapp, and has formed his opinons of Mr. Clapp as much from 
those communications as from his public discourses. When- 
ever he has heard any thing from the pulpit which he did not 
fully T understand, he has taken the earliest opportunity of ob- 
taining from Mr. Clapp a more complete exhibition of his 
views; and witness wishes thus publicly to testify, that, al- 
though in some particulars he differs with Mr. Clapp, at the 
same time he is convinced that his views accord almost en- 
tirely with the views of what are called the moderate Cal- 
vinists at the North. Witness states this from an intimate 
acquaintance with many clergymen in the Northern states. 

Ques. 16. Does witness remember what I have avowed or 
taught upon the subject of Creeds and Confessions ? 

Ans. He does. Mr. Clapp has stated that the Head of the 
church has given a Creed to his church ; that he thinks it 
wrong for any man, or body of men, to make a Confession 
of Faith other than that which our Saviour has given, pro- 
vided such Confession of Faith, or assent thereto, is requisite 
to admission into a church. That Jesus Christ has declared, 
that " whosoever believeth in Him shall be saved and that 
one who professes to believe in him, and gives evidence of 
his sincerity by a holy walk and conversation, has a right to 
demand admission into any church calling itself the church of 
Jesus Christ. 

Ques. 17. Does witness recollect the sentiments I have ex- 
pressed concerning prayer meetings ? 



232 



Jins. He does. Mr. Clapp has several times from his pul- 
pit spoken of the prayer meeting connected with his church, 
and has said that it was a means of grace upon which every 
member of his church should attend ; that at the same time 
we should not judge unfavourably of a professor of religion 
because he did not attend such meetings. Mr. Clapp has 
given as his reason for not attending generally such meetings 
himself, that he thought it was the duty of the laity to con- 
duct such meetings, and that he thought it would be the means 
of making them feel more deeply their individual responsibi- 
lity. Mr. Clapp has generally attended the monthly concert 
for prayer. 

CROSS EXAMINED BY THE COMMITTEE OF PROSECUTION. 

Ques. 1. Did not witness consider some of those sermons 
upon the doctrine of Trinity, to which witness refers in his tes- 
timony, as an ingenious defence of Unitarianism ? 

Ans, No. 

May 16, 1832. Mr. F. R. Southmayd returned and said, 
(L On further reflection he wished to correct his testimony in 
answer to the first question proposed by the Committee ;" 
and added the following, viz : Witness is not sure of having 
made use of such expressions, but acknowledges that he may 
have used such. Witness well recollects a particular sermon 
preached about the 1st of June last, with which he was 
much displeased, as he thought the object of the sermon was 
to prove that the Unitarian church was a Christian church ; 
and that he expressed his dissatisfaction to some of his inti- 
mate friends. At the close of the sermon, all members of 
the Christian churches present were invited to meet at the 
table of the Lord. Witness well recollects having made the 
remark at that time, on his return from the North, he would 
attend the Methodist church unless there were a minister in 
the Episcopal church with whom he was pleased. 

Ques. 2. What was the opprobrious language used by Mr. 



233 



Clapp, in presence of witness, in relation to the act of the ae* 
cused signing the questions recorded on the printed extracts of 
the Mississippi Presbytery at pages 60 and 61 ? 

Jlns. He said it was false ; that he had signed those ques- 
tions the first time without a full explanation of his views on 
those points. Here witness would remark that he understood 
from Mr. Clapp that the questions proposed to him both 
times were the same. 

Ques. 3. Does not witness recollect to have heard the ac- 
cused say that the Apostles attended to their secular business 
upon the Christian sabbath ? 

Jlns. Witness never has heard the accused say so, but has 
heard others say that he had said so. 

Ques. 4. Did witness understand the accused to say that he 
had not retained a copy or the original of the letter written 
by him to the Rev. George Potts, in which were mentioned 
the names of Mrs. Hearsey and others ? 

Jlns. Witness understood that the accused had not a copy 
of said letter, because the accused said he had written or 
should write to Mr. Potts for a copy. Witness does not tes- 
tify that the accused said he had not a copy. 

Ques. 5. Do the public exhibitions of Mr. Clapp's doctrine 
at all times appear to witness to correspond with his private 
ones upon the same doctrines ? 

Ans. Yes. On the subject of the perseverance of the 
saints, he has stated that his views were somewhat changed ; 
that he had found some passages of Holy Writ which he 
thought were proof texts in favour of the doctrine ; that at 
the same time there were others which he thought opposed 
the doctrine. Witness knows of no variation upon other 
points of doctrine. 

Ques. 6. Do you remember the language which Mr. Clapp 
used when he spoke disparagingly of the talents of members 
of the Presbytery ? 

Ans. I cannot recall the exact words. I think his remarks 
were, that they would do better if they studied more ; that he 
thought the Presbytery, as well as many others in the United 



234 



States, were more strenuous in upholding the Confession of 
Faith than the Bible. 

Ques. by Rev. W m. Montgomery. Did witness understand 
Mr. Clapp to mean that the obligation to keep the Christian 
sabbath was not founded upon the fourth commandment ? 

Ans. Yes. I understood Mr. Clapp to say, that all that 
Was moral in the fourth command was still binding, and that 
all that was ceremonial was done away. 

Ques. by moderator. Do you recollect any further testi- 
mony which you have to offer, either for or against the ac- 
cused, on the subject of the charges ? 

Ans. I have nothing further which I now recollect. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in presence 
of the parties, and approved, and the witness discharged. 

4 o'clock, P. M. 

The Presbytery resumed business. Rev. Mr. Warren in* 
formed the Presbytery that Mr. Clapp, in consequence of fa* 
tigue and indisposition, would not attend this afternoon. 
Thereupon, resolved, that we proceed to take the testimony 
of Mr. N. Goodale on the part of the Committee of prosecu- 
tion, and that Mr. Clapp have the privilege of cross examining 
the witness at some future time if he desire it, by giving due 
notice to the Commission of the Presbytery. 

Mr. N. Goodale was introduced by the Committee of pro- 
secution, and being duly sworn, testified as follows : 

Ques. 1. Will witness please to state what he has heard the 
accused say in relation to a certain letter from the accused to 
Rev. George Potts, in which it was said disrespectful men- 
tion was made of Madams Hearsey, Hill, and others ? 

Ans. Soon after the Rev. Theodore Clapp returned from 
the meeting of the Mississippi Presbytery in October last, he 
called upon me, and said he understood that Mrs. Goodale 
had been informed that he used Mrs. Hill's name in a disre- 
spectful manner in a certain letter to Rev. George Potts. He 
said he had called to tell me that it was a palpable lie ; that 



235 



he had not used Mrs. Hill's name at all in the letter, nor that 
of any other lady except Mrs. Hearsey's, which he mentioned 
only as belonging to the opposition, or party unfriendly to 
him. He said he did not war with women ; and expressed a 
hope that that letter above alluded to might be published. 

Ques. 2. Will witness state what he heard the accused say, 
after his return from the Presbytery at Port Gibson in Octo- 
ber last, in relation to the difficulties between him and that 
body being settled ? 

Jlns. He stated to me that the difficulties were all settled, 
and every thing amicably arranged. 

Ques. by moderator. Do you recollect any further testi- 
mony which you have to offer, either for or against the ac- 
cused, on the subject of the charges ? 

Ans. I do not recollect any thing further. 
# • ' .' 

The above testimony was read to the witness in presence 
of the Presbytery, and approved, and the witness discharged, 

Monday. New Orleans, May 14th, 1832, 
Rev. Benjamin Chase was introduced by the Committee of 
prosecution, and being duly sworn, testified as follows, viz. 

Ques. Will witness state what he recollects in relation to 
the first and second reports of the Committee of conference 
with Mr. Clapp in October, 1831, and also in relation to the 
1st and 2d sets of questions to which allusions have been so 
frequently made ? 

Here the accused announced to the Presbytery that an im- 
portant witness on his part was present, whom he wished to 
introduce at that time, as it would be inconvenient to secure 
his attendance in future. The testimony of Mr. Chase was 
therefore deferred, and Col. G. F. Hearsey introduced by the 
accused, and being duly sworn, testified as follows, viz. 

Ques. 1. Will witness state what he has heard me avow or 
teach upon the subject of sin ? 

32 



236 



Ans. I have not heard Mr. Clapp preach very often, but 
sufficiently often within twelve months, I presume, to judge 
what are his views of sin. I cannot say that I have perceived 
his views upon that subject to be materially different from 
what I have heard Presbyterian and Episcopal clergymen ge- 
nerally preach on that subject. I have heard Mr. Clapp state 
his views in a positive manner, — that an individual is not 
punishable for the sins of Adam. I have understood him to say, 
that the punishment that would have followed as the conse- 
quence of Adam's sin was obviated by the atonement of 
Christ. I have heard him say, that in consequence of Adam's 
sin we inherited a corrupt nature, which I understood to be 
explanatory of his views of original sin. 

Ques. 2. Will witness state what views he has heard me 
advance on the Trinity ? 

Jlns. The most that I recollect to have heard Mr. Clapp 
state on that subject was in the Bible class. He then exa- 
mined several texts of Scripture, which were generally con- 
sidered as proof texts of that doctrine, which he affirmed 
were not so. He gave his reasons for believing that they 
were not proof texts of the doctrine of the Trinity, and then 
stated that there were proof texts of that doctrine, some of 
which he quoted. If I had left the room before he had con- 
cluded his remarks I should have thought him a Unitarian, 
because he combatted some texts which I had considered as 
conclusive upon that point. 

Ques. 3. Does witness remember being present in the ses- 
sion-room of the first Presbyterian church during prayer 
meeting, or meetings preparatory to communion ? 

Arts. I remember being present at one meeting, which I 
think was preparatory to the communion. I am confident it 
was. 

Ques. 4. Does witness remember what representations I 
made at that meeting concerning the sufferings and death of 
the Son of God ? 

Ans. My impressions are that those facts were represented 
as an efficacious atonement. I recollect he said that there 
were differences of opinion on this subject ; but he remarked 



237 

(and I understood him as in answer to the various theories on 
the subject) that for us he was an all-sufficient sacrifice. 

Ques. 5. Has witness ever heard me give my views upon 
the Christian sabbath ? 

Ans. I have heard him preach upon that subject. I have 
not heard Mr. Clapp make any remarks that tended to relax 
the obligation of the sabbath, except with regard to the Jew- 
ish sabbath. He spoke of the Jewish sabbath as being mis- 
conceived, and that we were not under obligation to keep it. 
I have heard him speak very warmly against the profanation 
of the Christian sabbath. 

Ques. 6. Has witness ever heard me give my views con- 
cerning prayer ? 

Ans. I think Mr. Clapp recommended it as an important 
duty ; if he has ever denied intercessory prayer, it was not 
in my hearing. His remarks on the general subject of prayer 
were similar to those made by other clergymen. I have no 
recollection of hearing him pray when he did not make use 
of petitions for others. I do not recollect being present when 
the subject of prayer was discussed by Mr. Clapp. 

Ques. 7. Has witness ever heard me slander professors of 
religion who left my church since April 1830 ? 

Ans. The most that I recollect is this : I have not been 
much in the way of hearing remarks of that kind. I think I 
recollect to have heard him speak of the ignorance of indivi- 
duals who were opposed to him ; I think I have heard him 
say that the ignorance or misconception of individuals has 
been injurious to him. In regard to individuals in this city, I 
think I have heard him make use of language stronger than 
that. I have heard him say of one or two individuals, that 
they had behaved dishonestly he feared ; that they had done 
harm for the sake of doing harm. No names were mentioned ; 
I do not know who were meant. 

Ques. 8. Did not witness hear me say, after my return from 
the meeting of the Presbytery at Port Gibson in October last, 
the differences between myself and the Mississippi Presbytery- 
were amicably arranged ? 



238 



Ans. I believe I did hear Mr. Clapp say so. He said that, 
or words to that effect. 

Ques. 9. Did not witness hear me speak in terms of respect 
and friendship for the members of the Mississippi Presbytery 
at that time ? 

Ans. The impression upon my mind is, that he did speak in 
that manner, and that a reconciliation had taken place between 
him and that body, and that the difficulties were removed. 
He spoke of an amicable arrangement ; I heard him use no 
stronger language. 

Ques. 10. Does witness remember to have conversed with 
me concerning a letter written to the Rev. George Potts, in 
which it was said disrespectful mention was made of the name 
of Mrs. Hearsey and others ? 

Jlns. I have heard something of that letter. I think he 
said he did not intend to charge the persons named in the 
letter with iniquity, but to express his regret that they had 
attached themselves to a party which had originated in ini- 
quity. 

Ques. 11. Does witness recollect conversing with me about 
the interrogatories in the printed extracts from the minutes of 
the Mississippi Presbytery ? 

Jlns. I do not recollect any conversation upon that subject. 

The Committee of prosecution declined asking any ques- 
tions in cross examination. 

Ques. by the moderator. Have you any thing further to 
offer in relation to those charges ? 

Jlns. In the remarks of Mr. Clapp respecting the persons 
here to whom he seemed to think his opinions related, I have 
observed an impatience at their proceedings, but not a spirit 
of malignity. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in presence 
of the parties, and approved, and the witness discharged. 
Rev. B. Chase was again called upon, and proceeded with 



239 



his testimony by answering the following question, which had 
been previously proposed ; viz. 

Ques. I. Will witness state what he recollects in relation to 
the 1st and 2d reports of the Committee of conference with 
Mr. Clapp in October 1831, and also in relation to the 1st 
and 2d sets of questions to which allusions have been so fre- 
quently made ? 

Ans. In reference to those reports, there appears to me to 
be much indistinctness upon the minds of many who have al- 
luded to them. To the best of my knowledge, both reports 
were identically the same, without being rewritten. In pre- 
senting the same report twice, it was each time based upon in- 
formation contained in an accompanying document ; viz. a set 
of questions, which the Committee thought proper to propose 
to Mr. Clapp for the purpose of obtaining a definite expression 
of his agreement or disagreement with the Presbytery upon 
certain points of doctrine and duty. The supposed necessity 
arose from the following circumstance : viz. Apparent dis- 
crepancies between two written statements of Mr. Clapp then 
before the Presbytery, viz. his letters of March 5th, 1830, and 
October 14th, 1831. In the former he enumerated several 
points of doctrine which he seemed to regard as the views of 
the Presbytery, and said " he disbelieved, and thought it his 
duty to preach against, them." In the latter he attempted 
to shew that he believed them all which he had there en- 
deavoured to explain, and always had as explained in that 
letter, with the exception of the last mentioned article, viz. 
"perseverance of the saints;' 1 * and asserted that there 
had been no material change in his views, that he was con- 
scious of, since writing the former letter of March 5th, 1830, 
except with respect to that one point. In order to ascer- 
tain more satisfactorily how far these two statements were 
in accordance with each other and with the views of the 
Presbytery, a Committee was appointed to examine the ex- 
planatory letter of October 14, 1831, and instructed to con- 



* Printed extracts, page 59, 



240 



fer with Mr. Clapp, but not told in what way their con- 
ference should be held. They chose to do it by proposing 
written interrogatories to Mr. Clapp, embracing the points 
upon which it was supposed his views were at variance with 
those of the Presbytery. That Committee retired with him 
to the back seats of the room in which the Presbytery was 
sitting, and there a conference ensued between him and them 
upon such topics as the parties thought proper to introduce. 
It was with the result only of that conversation that the Pres- 
bytery had any concern. At the close of that interview, the 
Chairman of the Committee offered a report, founded, as he 
said, upon the information which they had obtained through 
the medium of the questions and personal conversation with 
Mr. Clapp. Let it be distinctly understood, the questions were 
not the report, but an accompanying document upon which the 
report was founded.* 

Preparatory to presenting their report, the chairman pro- 
ceeded to read certain interrogatories which he said the Com- 
mittee had propounded to Mr. Clapp, and to each of which he 
asserted Mr. Clapp had given an answer. In the progress 
of reading these questions, the chairman stopped to offer ver- 
bal explanations, and was labouring to convince the Presby- 
tery that Mr. Clapp's real views on those points were much 
more in accordance with those of the Presbytery than the 
answers which he had appended to some of the questions 
seemed to indicate. At that time the inquiry was made by 
a member, " whether the chairman was offering a written re- 
port, as his duty required, or his own talk as a part of it ?" 
In the mean time, another member, w ? ho had been absent, 
came in, and in passing near the chairman cast his eye upon 
the document in his hand, and discovering that part of the 
answers were written with a pencil, inquired " whether the 
Committee were offering that as a complete report 1" Ano- 
ther inquiry was made also, " whether Mr. Clapp's name 
" were appended to his answers, so that it could be known at 
" a future day who was the author of those answers." This 



* Printed extracts, page 60. 



241 



was replied to in the negative. One other inquiry was made 
of the chairman, " whether it would not be better, if Mr. 
" Clapp's real views were so much more in accordance with 
" ours than his answers there given seemed to indicate, for 
" him to give them such answers as would fully convey his 
" meaning without requiring explanations, and sign his name 
" to them with pen and ink ?" These suggestions were made 
to the chairman of the Committee in presence of Mr. Clapp ; 
and either then, or at the close of his reading the questions, 
and before he read a word of the report founded upon them, 
the chairman requested leave to withdraw that document, and 
for the Committee to have time for another interview with 
Mr. Clapp. That privilege was granted. After another in- 
terview with Mr. Clapp, in the same room where the Presby- 
tery was sitting, the chairman of the Committee again an- 
nounced that he was ready to report. Permission was grant- 
ed, and he proceeded, as before, to read a set of questions 
preparatory to reading the report. This was the 2d set of 
questions, and the same that is now seen in the printed extracts 
of our minutes at pages 60 and 61. In confirmation of which 
he had before stated, " that Mr. Clapp's real views upon those 
"points were much more in accordance with those of the 
;{ Presbytery than some of his answers to the former ques- 
" tions seemed to indicate." He stated in Mr. Clapp's presence, 
without his denying it, that he (Mr. Clapp) had signed this 
2d set of questions more definitely, without offering a word of 
explanation. After reading them, the chairman read for the 
first time what has been termed the 2d report, which was 
predicated upon the sincerity of Mr. Clapp's subscription to 
the questions without explanation. 

This I believe to be a correct account of the whole matter. 
Certain I am, that whatever Mr. Clapp's explanations to the 
Committee might have been, they had produced the convic- 
tion upon their minds that his views upon those points were 
substantially in accordance with those of the Presbytery. 
They expressly say so in their report, which is as follows : 
viz. 



242 



u Your Committee on the Rev. Mr. Clapp's letter beg leave 
*' to report, that, upon examination of his letter and personal 
"conference with him, (the result of which is hereto append- 
" ed,*) it is their opinion that there is no such essential difFer- 
" ence between his views and ours as to disqualify him for 
" continuing as a member (minister) of our church." 

This is the report which was presented by the Committee 
with the questions both times, and finally read, in the last in- 
stance, without his objecting that it represented him as too 
nearly according with our views. Of the fact that it was his 
intention to produce the conviction that his views accorded 
with ours, we could not doubt, from the circumstance under 
which he so definitely signed the second interrogatories, and 
heard it anounced by the Committee, without contradiction, 
" That, as proof of the accordance of his views with ours, Mr. 
" Clapp had signed them without offering a word of explana- 
u tion." 

Ques. 2, Does witness recollect whether any doubt was 
expressed in Mr. Clapp's presence of his sincerity in signing 
those questions without explanations ? 

Am. Yes, by more than one member. I distinctly recol- 
lect that when the final report was under consideration, I re- 
marked, that if we admitted his sincerity in signing the ques- 
tions, we had no warrant for believing his sentiments would 
continue to be the same until he reached New Orleans. In jus- 
tification of the remark, I recurred to an observation of Mr. 
Clapp's in a sermon at Port Gibson, but two evenings before, 
in presence of most of the members of the Presbytery, viz : 
" That he did not believe there were twenty Presbyterian 
" ministers in the United States regenerated men, whose theo- 
" logical views continued the same for twelve months. 7 ' If 
such, I observed, were his views then, they might, and pro- 
bably would, undergo some change before he arrived at home. 
Another member succeeded me in remarking that such a 
document apparently ought to be received as satisfactory, but 

* Viz. The questions still more definitely signed. See printed extracts, 
pages 60, 61. 



243 



he felt constrained to say he had not confidence in Mr. Clapp's 
sincerity in signing those questions. Mr. Clapp rose, and re- 
plied, that he felt hurt with such remarks ; and that he did 
not believe there was a man in the Presbytery whose theolo- 
gical views were more stable than his. He made no attempt 
to explain or remove the impression that he designed that 
to be regarded as a definite expression of his views of the doc- 
trines subscribed without any qualification. 

Ques. 3. Will witness state whether he heard any thing said 
about proposing questions to Mr. Clapp previously to the ap- 
pointment of the Committee to confer with him ? 

Ans. Witness did not hear any thing said about it previous- 
ly at the Presbytery, but a short time before the meeting, per- 
haps within a week, he saw a letter from Mr. Hugh Farrie, 
addressed to the Rev. George Potts, respecting the letter in 
which it was said Mr. Farrie's name was disrespectfully used. 
In that letter, Mr. Farrie stated he understood Mr. Clapp was 
coming up to attend the approaching meeting of the Presby- 
tery, and he presumed would make a desperate effort to have 
matters settled between himself and the Presbytery. He 
said, moreover, that he had no doubt but Mr. Clapp would 
subscribe to the Confession of Faith again, or even to the 
Mahometan Creed, if required, in order to effect his object. 
Witness does not state this as the precise language of the 
letter, but the substance of it as near as he can recollect. 
Witness heard some fears expressed at that time that Mr. Far- 
rie's conjecture was too well founded ; but he does not recollect 
hearing the subject named at the Presbytery prior to the ap- 
pointment of the Committee to confer with Mr. Clapp. 

Ques. 4. Will witness state whether the first set of ques- 
tions and Mr. Clapp's answers were shewn to him by the 
Committee ? 

Ans. They were not ; but after the Presbytery had adjourn- 
ed that day, witness observed some waste papers upon the floor 
where the clerk, having transcribed his minutes, had thrown 
them down. He felt a curiosity to see the first set of ques- 
tions, and, looking among those waste papers on the floor, he 
found and saw said questions then for the first time. 

33 



244 



Ques. 5. Were there written explanations accompanying 
all the answers of the accused to the first set of questions ? 

Ans. There were not. Two of the answers had no expla- 
nations whatever ; but simply signed, affirmatively, " I do." 
To the article on election and final perseverance, he gave 
two answers in the first set of questions, both nearly the 
same. The first was written with pencil mark, " This ar- 
" tide expresses substantially my views on election and final 
" perseverance." He, or some other person, had drawn a pen 
over that, and another added below, " Yes," written with ink. 
The other answers to the remaining questions were all writ- 
ten with pencil, and thought by some to be ambiguously ex- 
pressed, and needed explanation as much as the reconciling of 
the two letters of March 5th, 1830, and October 14th, 1831, 
then before the Presbytery. 

Ques. 6. If witness has the first set of questions and the 
answers of the accused, will he please state them all as they 
originally stood ? 

Ans. Yes ; the following is an exact copy of the original 
questions and the answers of the accused as they originally 
stood, viz : 

Divinity of Christ. 



Do you believe that there are three per- 
sons in the Godhead ; that Jesus Christ, eter- 
nally and essentially God, equal with the Fa- * 
ther in wisdom, power, and glory ? 



f Ans. I believe in one God, 
the Father, Son, and Holy 
Ghost ; that these three in es- 
sential attributes are equal, 
in some respects are different, 
and do not object to the terra 
person being employed to 
designate this difference pro- 
vided we avoid the errors of 
^Tritheism. 



Personality and Influence of the Holy Spirit. 

Do you believe in the distinct personality^ 
of the Holy Spirit ; his equality with the Fa- Am j believe i n tQe ne . 
ther and Son in wisdom, power, and glory, | cesslly G f the influences of 
the necessity of his agency in the regenera- > theHo i y Spirit to the produc- 
tion of human hearts, in the production of tion of faith and holine3S . 
faith and repentance, and every thing moral- 
ly good in man ? J 



245 



Church Communion, 



Do you believe that Unitarians, or persons^) 
holding the negative of the above questions 
however sincere their professions, and how- 



Ans. On this subject it is 
my wish to conform to the 



ever correct their moral deportment, should j>rules and regulations of the 

Presbyterian church so long 
as I may be attached to it. 



not be admitted to communion at the Lord's 
table by a minister of the Presbyterian 
church ? 



Eternity of Future Punishment. 

Do you believe that the punishment of the ) Ans. I believe in the eter- 
finally impenitent will be without end ? ) nity of future punishment. 

Election and Final Perseverance. 



Do you believe that God did choose in^ 
Christ, before the foundation of the world, a 
certain definite number of the individuals of 
mankind, hell-deserving sinners, whom he 
determined specially and effectually to call 
with a high and holy calling: not accord- 
ing to their works, nor on account of any 
foresight of good in them, but according to 



Jns. This article expresses 
substantially my views on 



his own purpose and grace, whom he deter- } election and final perseve 
mined to regenerate, purposing to work in ranee, 
them to repent and believe, and designing to Ans. Yes. 
keep them by his own power through faith, 
unto eternal salvation, ready to be revealed in 
the last day to the praise of the riches of the 
glory of his grace ; and that these and no 
others will be regenerated, sanctified, and 
saved? J 



Utility of Creeds. 

Do you believe that Creeds and Confes-^j 
sions of Faith are useful and necessary as de- f 
finite expressions of what, in our view, the [ 
Scriptures contain ? j 



Ans. I do. 



Intercessory Prayer. 



Do you believe in the efficacy of interces- 
sory prayer as usually held by the Presbyte- 
rian church ? 



Am. I do. 



246 



Ques t 7. Has witness heard the accused avow or teach any 
thing on the doctrine of the Trinity ? and if he has, will he 
state what ? 

Ans. In a conversation with Mr. Clapp, in April 1830, he 
said he believed in the divinity of Christ, but there was no 
Scripture to prove it. Witness referred him to the 1st chap- 
ter of Hebrews, where Christ is called God : " But unto the 
Son he saith, thy throne, O God, is forever and ever." And 
also to Isaiah, where he is called " Wonderful, Counsellor, 
the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace." 
He replied, names proved nothing ; that I could not show him 
a name given to God in the Old Testament which he could 
not show me given to creatures in the New Testament. Wit- 
ness asked him what he meant by " creatures ?" if he included 
Christ as one of them ? He replied, " I mean creatures, 
things." Witness asked him if the name " Jehovah" was ap- 
plied to " creatures" and " things" in the New Testament ? 
" Yes, all through it ; and it is your ignorance of the original 
that you do not know it." He said, " there was nobody pre- 
" tended to bring Scripture to prove the divinity of Christ in 
" those days ; that the proof texts had all been given up long 
" since." Witness said, not by Professor Stewart. " Yes," 
he replied, " by Professor Stewart ; I correspond with him, 
" and I tell you he has given them up ; Professor Stewart 
" changes his theological opinions every month." Witness 
makes this statement from notes which he took immediately 
after the conversation, and therefore feels very confident of 
its correctness. 

Ques. 8. What statements has witness heard the accused 
make in relation to the pastoral letter brought by witness to 
New Orleans ? 

Ans. When I read the pastoral letter to the church, he 
(the accused) said it was " false, base, and contemptible." He 
assigned some reasons to show it was false ; he said it was 
there asserted that he had adopted, or subscribed to, the Con- 
fession of Faith, which he never did. He offered one reason 
to prove that the gentleman who brought the letter there 
knew it to be false, viz. " that he asked permission to see the 



247 



* letter before it was read to the church, and was told he 
" might, and went with witness to his boarding-house for the 
" purpose of seeing it, but when he arrived there witness re- 
" fused to let him see it. This, (he said) was an evident proof 
" that he (witness) knew it contained lies, and was ashamed 
" to show it." It is true, that on arriving at his boarding- 
place, witness did refuse to let the accused see the pastoral 
letter, but for a very different reason from that assigned by 
the accused to the church. That was the truth, but not the 
whole truth. On the way to witness's boarding-house, the ac- 
cused remarked, " he was on his own dung-hill here in New 
" Orleans, and if there were any thing in that letter which he 
" did not like, I should not read it to the church." It was 
that threat which induced witness to refuse to put it into his 
hands, and not for the reason assigned by him, viz. " that it 
" contained lies, and I was ashamed to show it." He said 
also, that he was there said to belong to the Mississippi Pres- 
bytery, " which was false ; that he was licensed and ordained 
"by a Congregational Association in Massachusetts, from 
" which he had never been dismissed, and to which he then 
" belonged and always had." He then went on to ridicule 
the idea of dissolving a connexion which had never existed. 
He added much more of a similar import. 

Ques. 9. When Mr. Clapp said " the name Jehovah was ap- 
plied to creatures in the New Testament" and also that Profes- 
sor Stewart changed his theological opinions every month, 
did you consider him as speaking facetiously ? 

Ans. No, I did not. It was said in a conversation in 
which he was showing the difference between his views and 
those of the Presbytery. During this conversation, in talking 
upon the principal doctrines of the Gospel, the distinguishing 
ground which he took, in respect to several of them, was, that 
he believed them on the ground of their consistency with 
common sense, and not because they were supported by Re- 
velation. An hour or two afterwards we conversed upon 
the same topics again, during a part of which time Mr. May- 
bin was present. In this conversation he advocated the same 
doctrines, and appealed to Scripture for the support of some of 



248 



them. When I reminded him that this was different ground 
from that which he took in the morning, he said it was false. 
Witness then recurred to some of his remarks respecting the 
divinity of Christ, where he said it was not supported by 
Scripture. The accused again denied it, and raising his hand, 
called God to witness that it was false. This occurrence 
was noted down by witness immediately after it took place, 
and he is therefore very confident of the correctness of his 
statement. 

CROSS EXAMINED BY MR. CLAPP. 

Ques. I. Will witness state what parts of my letter of 
March 5th, 1830, to the Mississippi Presbytery, and of Oc- 
tober 14th, 1831, were considered by him to be contradic- 
tory ? 

Ans. Witness did not say they were contradictory, but 
that there were apparent discrepancies in them. In the for- 
mer the accused enumerated several points of doctrine which 
he seemed to regard as the views of the Presbytery, and said 
lie disbelieved and thought it his duty to preach against them. 
In the latter, he endeavoured to show that he believed them 
all which he had there attempted to explain, and always had 
as explained in that letter, with the exception of saints' perse- 
verance ; and asserted that there had been no material change 
in his views that he was conscious of since writing the former 
letter of March 5th, 1830, except with respect to that one 
point This is as I understood the letters. 

Ques. 2. In what part of my letter of March 5th, 1830, do 
I say that I regard the doctrines which I felt it my duty to 
preach against as the doctrines of the Presbytery ? 

Ans. The letter will speak for itself. 

Ques. 3. In what part of my letter of October 1 4th, 1831, 
do I say that I always had believed in the unconditional elec- 
tion of part of mankind to eternal life and eternal reprobation 
of the remainder? 

Ans. Witness did not make any such assertion. That let- 
ter also speaks for itself. 



249 



Ques. 4. In what part of my letter of October 14th, 1831, 
do I attempt to explain my belief in unconditional election of 
a part of mankind to eternal life and the eternal reprobation 
of the remainder ? 

Ans. This letter of October 14th, 1831, is professedly writ- 
ten to explain the doctrinal views contained in the letter of 
March 5th, 1830. At the close of his explanations he says, 
" at the present time I believe the doctrines of election, origi- 
" nal sin, atonement, regeneration, and final perseverance of 
" the saints, as above explained." See printed Extracts, p. 
59. 

Ques. 5. Did not witness understand me as attempting to 
deny in my letter of October 14th, 1831, the doctrines of un- 
conditional election and reprobation, imputation of Adam's 
personal sin to his posterity, limited atonement, physical ina- 
bility, and the entire passivity of the soul in conversion ? 

Ans. Witness understood him as attempting to show how 
far his views were in accordance with our's, and to arrive at 
the conclusion himself that there was no material difference 
between us. His language is, " I hope the above explana- 
" tions and Confession of Faith will satisfy my brethren that 
" my views concerning the essential doctrines of religion are 
u not unsound." Printed Extracts, p. 59. 

Ques. 6. Will witness state whether he was present when 
I preached in Mr. Butler's church at Port Gibson in the even- 
ing of the first day of the meeting of the Presbytery in that 
place in October last? 

Ans. Witness was present, and heard the accused preach 
on the subject of charity on that evening he thinks. 

On motion, resolved, that at the request of the accused, the 
cross examination of Mr. Chase be suspended for the purpose 
of introducing a witness who was present on the part of the 
accused. 

Whereupon, the Rev. James A. Fox was introduced by the 
accused, and being duly sworn, testified as follows : 

Ques. 1. by Mr. Clapp. Will witness state whether he re- 



250 

members conversing with me the past winter on the proceed- 
ings of the Mississippi Presbytery in my case at Port Gibson 
in October last ? 

Ans. I do remember. I understood Mr. Clapp that the 
differences between him and the Presbytery had been arrang- 
ed. I observed to Mr. Clapp, that I did not suppose he had 
adopted the views of the Presbytery with respect to the doc- 
trines heretofore controverted between them, or that they had 
adopted his views. He said, no ; that the Presbytery knew 
that his views were, for the most part at least, in accordance 
with what is termed the New School ; and that he did not 
wish to withdraw from the Presbyterian church if this School 
prevailed. This was the substance of our conversation at that 
time ; I cannot testify as to the words. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in presence 
of the parties, and approved, and the witness discharged. 

Resolved, that we have a recess until 4 o'clock this after- 
noon. 

4 o'clock, P. M. 
The Presbytery resumed business, and proceeded to hear 
the farther testimony of Mr. Chase. 

CROSS EXAMINED BY MR. CLAPP. 

Ques. 7. Does witness remember, that after I had finished 
my sermon at Port Gibson, I gave, in a few words, my views 
concerning election ; and also stated that I took that oppor- 
tunity to do it, because my brethren of the Mississippi Presby- 
tery were present ? 

Ans. Witness recollects the accused made remarks con- 
cerning election, but has no recollection of his allusion to the 
presence of his brethren of the Presbytery. 

Ques. 8. Does witness remember any particulars as to the 
thoughts or the diction of the remarks I made on election in 
Mr. Butler's church after my sermon on charity ? 

Ans. Witness could not specify particulars. 



251 



Ques. 9. Does not witness remember, that when I said there 
were not twenty Presbyterian ministers in the United States 
of regenerate hearts, who did not frequently change their 
theological views, that I at the same time made a discrimina- 
tion between essential and non-essential doctrines ? and also 
expressed the opinion that on certain essential points all Chris- 
tian ministers held similar views ? 

Ans. Witness has no recollection of that. His impression 
is just the reverse of that, though he would not attempt to state 
definitely. 

Ques. 10. Does not witness remember my using on that 
occasion the following illustration: viz. " Natural philosophy 
" tells us that all the colours in the w T orld are either one of the 
" seven primary colours, red, orange, yellow, green, blue, in- 
" digo, or violet, or certain combinations of these ; so all evan- 
" gelical views of religion in the world, though infinitely diver- 
" sified and modified, may be decomposed into a few simple 
" ingredients V 

Ans. During some part of the discourse witness thinks there 
was an allusion of that kind made. 

Ques. 11. Does not witness remember when the Commit- 
tee of conference, of which Mr. Donan was chairman, offered 
to make their first report, that the chairman commenced read- 
ing his report, and that the reading of the entire report was 
arrested ? 

Ans. No; witness thinks he did not read a w T ord of the 
report the first time, but the questions upon which the report 
was founded. 

Ques. 12. Does witness believe that the questions which 
Mr. Donan read the first time he offered his report were the 
same which he afterwards found under the clerk's table ? 

Jlns. He does. The first opportunity he had of consulting 
with one member of the Committee, he told witness he be- 
lieved it to be the same paper ; the pencil marks appear evi- 
dently to be in Mr. Clapp's own hand-w T riting, and correspond 
with the penmanship of his letters in possession of the Pres- 
bytery. 

Ques. 13. Will witness state what was the object of the 

34 



252 



Presbytery in appointing the Committee of conference of 
which Mr. Donan was chairman ? 

Ans. The Presbytery expressed no opinion upon the sub- 
ject, except the directions given to the Committee as stated in 
their minutes from which their printed extracts were taken. 
So far as witness understood the object of that Committee, it 
was to ascertain, more definitely,. Mr, Clapp's views respecting 
the doctrines contained in his letters then before the Presby- 
tery. 

Ques. 14. Did not witness consider, that in justice all com- 
munications and explanations made to a Committee appointed 
by the Presbytery to confer with the accused on his theolo- 
gical tenets, were actually made to the Presbytery itself? 

Arts. No. Our rules require that ail Committees should 
present their reports in writing, and they never are expected 
to assign reasons, in handing in the report, why it is as they 
present it ; but when the question for adoption comes up, 
which would make the sentiments of the report the sentiments 
of the Presbytery, then the Committee have an opportunity 
of assigning their reasons. 

Ques. 15. If that Committee of conference had believed, 
from verbal communications made to them by the accused, 
that there was an essential departure in his views from the 
standards of the Presbyterian church, would it not have been, 
in the opinion of witness, their duty to have reported that the 
accused was disqualified for being continued as a member of 
the Presbytery ? 

Ans. The question appears to be simply this : — whether the 
Committee should be honest or not ? Witness has no hesita- 
tion in saying they should be strictly honest and faithful in 
their report. Mr, Clapp's explanations to them appeared to 
have satisfied them that his views were very nearly in accord- 
ance with ours, and, like honest men, they said so in their re- 
port. If the Presbytery had thought so too, they would, no 
doubt, have adopted their report, and arrested all farther pro- 
ceedings in relation to Mr. Clapp's doctrines. 

Quts. 16. Will witness- state what there was in my expla- 



253 



irations and communications to the Committee that the Pres- 
bytery expressed themselves dissatisfied with ? 

Am. As witness was not on the Committee, he knew no- 
thing about the explanations, except so far as their tendency 
was exhibited in the report. 

Ques. 17. Has not witness seen and perused some of my 
original letters, or parts of them, or extracts from them ; or 
heard some of my original letters, or parts of them, or extracts 
from them, or copies of them, read, which were addressed to 
the Rev. George Potts on my religious views prior to March 
5th, 1830 ? 

Ans. Witness does not recollect. He remembers, that in 
the morning before the pastoral letter was presented to the 
church, in April 1830, the accused charged Mr. Potts with 
betraying the trust which he had reposed in him by shewing 
his confidential letters. The same evening, after the pastoral 
letter was read, Mr. Clapp stated that the Presbytery &new 
all the changes that had taken place in his views, from time to 
time, for the last year or two ; and that he considered these 
communications to Mr. Potts the same thing as if made to the 
Presbytery. He stated this to show $he church, that, so far 
from there being in him any want of candour, as was asserted 
in the pastoral letter, that the Presbytery had taken advantage 
of his candour in communicating his views to Mr. Potts, and 
brought him into the difficulties in which he then was. Wit- 
ness recollects distinctly that he was very much surprised to 
hear him make such a representation, when he had no know- 
ledge of Mr. Potts ^having shown any part of the correspond- 
ence above alluded to, and had assured the accused of this 
fact. <Upon reflection, witness further recollects., that at some 
period since April 1830, Mr. Potts read a letter, or part of a 
letter, which he said was from the Rev. Theodore Clapp, in 
which permission was given to show any or all of the letters 
which he had ever written him if he chose. Since that time 
witness remembers hearing Mr. Potts read some letters, or 
parts of some letters, which he understood were from Mr. 
Clapp, but he did not see or hear any dates .mentioned that jie 
now recollects. 



254 



Ques. 18. During the conversation which witness had with 
the accused at his house in April 1830, when he brought down 
the pastoral letter, did witness understand me to say that the 
doctrines of the divinity of our Saviour, and the atonement, 
could be deduced from the principles of common sense ? 

Ans. Witness does not recollect that the accused made use 
of the expression " deduced from the principles of common 
sense." His remark was in substance, that he believed in 
the divinity of Christ, but not on Scriptural grounds ; that no 
intelligent man pretended to bring Scripture to prove it. In 
the course of his remarks upon that subject, Mr. Clapp em- 
ployed both those words, "reason" and "common sense," 
and some conversation ensued upon the meaning of the 
words as he used them. 

Ques. 19. In the conversation above alluded to, which took 
place at the house of the accused, concerning proof in sup- 
port of the divinity of our Saviour and the atonement, did 
witness understand the accused as maintaining that the above- 
named doctrines could have been discovered without a Reve- 
lation ? 

Ans. He said nothing about discovering them as I recol- 
lect. He said he believed in the divinity of Christ, but not 
because taught in the Scriptures ; that was the prominent idea 
set forth in his remarks. 

Ques. 20. Is witness sure that I averred there was not a 
single proof text in the Bible in support of the divinity of our 
Saviour or the atonement ? 

Ans. Witness did not mention the atonement in that con- 
nection. He said the accused asserted that no intelligent 
man pretended to bring Scripture to prove the divinity of 
Christ. Witness recollects the accused made a further remark, 
that all passages of Scripture in support of it had been given 
up long ago. 

Ques. 21. During the conversation which witness had with 
the accused at the house of Mrs. Robinson, subsequently to 
the one which took place at the house of the accused, does 
not witness remember of stating to me, in the presence of 
Mr. Maybin, that the accused had said to witness, at the house 



255 



of the accused, that there were no Scripture proofs for the 
divinity of our Saviour and the atonement 1 

Ans. The morning before witness left the city, the accused 
called on him at the house of Mrs. Robinson in company 
with Mr. Maybin, and stated he wished to ask witness a 
question or two in presence of witnesses. His first question 
was, witness thinks, " Did you tell Mr. Maybin that I denied 
the atonement of Christ?" and appealed to Mr. Maybin to 
know whether he did not understand witness to say so. Mr. 
Maybin answered affirmatively. Witness replied it was very 
probable he did, but not without referring, either before or 
after, to Mr. Clapp's manner of stating the doctrine ; that, in 
reference to his view of the subject, witness did consider 
him as denying it, and for this reason : Mr. Clapp said, " he be- 
" lieved in the atonement, that we were benefitted by the atone- 
" ment of Christ ; but the Scriptures did not tell us how we 
" were benefitted. That all those passages which speak of our 
" being * redeemed by the blood of Christ,' were symbolical ; 
" and we did not know what was their meaning. That the suf- 
" ferings of Christ were less than those of many martyrs. That 
" Christ could not have endured the agonies of a guilty con- 
" science, which, no doubt, the martyrs in some degree felt." 
Witness told Mr. Clapp, that with reference to this mode of 
his explaining the atonement, it was very probable he had told 
Mr. Maybin, as he recollected to have told others, that he de- 
nied it ; meaning by it, that that was the light in which witness 
viewed it. Mr. Clapp then turned about and said, " take no- 
tice Mr. Maybin, Mrs. Robinson, and Mrs. Trimble, there is 
" one lie I have proved upon him." 

His second question was. " Did you tell Mr. Maybin I 
denied the divinity of Christ ?" appealing to him again to 
know whether he did not understand me to say so. Mr. May- 
bin answered affirmatively. Witness told Mr. Clapp that, in 
reference to his manner of stating the doctrine, viz. " that he 
" believed in the divinity of Christ, but not because it was sup- 
" ported by the Scriptures," he had no doubt but he told Mr. 
Maybin, as he recollected to have told others, that Mr. Clapp 
denied the divinity of Christ ; and that he had no recollection 



256 



of telling Mr. Maybin, or any other one, without, either be- 
fore or after, stating to them the reason of it. Mr. Clapp then 
appealed the second time to Mr. Maybin, Mrs. Robinson, and 
Mrs. Trimble ; and said, " take notice there are two lies which 
I have proved upon him." 

Tuesday. New Orleans, May [5th, 1832. 

CROSS EXAMINATION OF MR. CHASE, CONTINUED BY MR. CLAPP. 

Ques. 22. Does witness remember any further particulars 
of the conversation between him and the accused at the 
house of Mrs. Robinson in April 1830 ? 

Ans. Witness does not remember any thing in particular 
of the conversation at that time besides the conversation be- 
fore alluded to. We conversed there at other times on va- 
rious subjects. 

Ques. 23. Does not witness remember, during that conver- 
sation, that he admitted that the members of the Mississippi 
Presbytery suspected that the accused either was or would 
soon become a Unitarian ? 

Ans. Witness remembers expressing that as his own opi- 
nion, and giving his reasons for it, which were in substance the 
following, viz. That different individuals had informed me 
that Mr. Clapp stated in public that " he was a candid and 
honest inquirer after truth." I told him declarations of that 
kind at the North were understood to be a warning that some 
discoveries were soon to he made, and that this appeared to 
have been the case with him. It was said he very soon after 
announced the English translation of the Bible to be an un- 
safe book for persons to read who did not understand the 
originals. This remark he had repeated to me at his own 
house a day or two before, and defied me to name five Pres- 
byterian ministers in the United States who could read the 
Bible in the original, (I supposed he meant the Hebrew,) and 
derive their doctrines from that source. He afterwards al- 
lered the expression, and defied me to name one minister who 
<sould do it. He said, moreover, that the Bible was translated 



257 



by a sect, a party, and made to speak the language of that 1 
party ; so that those who depended on the translation were 
deceived, or perhaps the expression was, liable to be deceived. 
Another reason was, his denying the personality of the Holy 
Spirit and rejecting Scripture proofs of the divinity of 
Christ. These are some of the principal reasons which I as- 
signed to Mr. Clapp for believing he was at heart a Unita- 
rian. A day or two after that conversation, I addressed a 
letter to Mr. Robert H. M'Nair of this city, giving him in de- 
tail all my principal reasons for believing the accused was a 
Unitarian. There was also one other reason which I as- 
signed to Mr. Clapp at that time, viz. what he had told me a 
day or two before respecting an offer which he had to take 
charge of a Unitarian congregation. He said, in reference to 
his being cut off from the Presbytery, " that he believed we had 
" been actuated by invidious motives, and wished to injure him 
" in his worldy circumstances because he had so large a salary \ 
" but he had more anchors to the windward than we were 
" aware of, and we should find ourselves disappointed, for he 
" had the offer of a much larger salary than he was then re- 
" ceiving to take charge of a Unitarian congregation, whicfe 
" he could accept at any time he chose." 

Ques. 24. Does not witness remember saying, at the house 
of Mrs. Robinson on that occasion, that if their predictions 
were not verified, he would admit they had formed incorrect 
opinions as to the nature of my sentiments, or to that effect ? 

Arts. Witness does not know to whom the word " they" re- 
fers : if it be intended to refer to the different members of the 
Presbytery, he has no knowledge of the Presbytery ever having 
made such predictions. But if it refer to the remarks which 
witness himself made concerning the accused becoming a 
Unitarian, he recollects saying, " If Mr. Clapp did not soon 
a come out openly and avowedly a Unitarian, he would admit 
" that he was very much mistaken," or words to that effect. 

Ques. 25. Does witness remember if any person was pre- 
sent during the conversation which he had with the accused 
at the house of the accused, in April 1830 1 

Ans. There was no person present during that converse 



258 



tion whom I saw. The Rev. Mr. Hiestand came in just at the 
close of the conversation, to whom I was introduced by the 
accused ; and, to the best of my recollection, we took our hats 
and walked with him before he sat down. 

Ques. 26. Does not witness remember that, during the con- 
versation held at the house of the accused in April 1830, 
many topics were introduced and hastily descanted on ; and 
also, that there was a good deal of hurry and confusion, and 
some apparent excitement ? 

Ans.. I have already stated that the accused proposed dis- 
cussing on that occasion all the principal doctrines of the 
Gospel. In reply to that proposition, I remarked, there was 
not time to do it, because it was necessary to notify the mem- 
bers of the church to convene that evening to receive the 
pastoral letter. The accused answered, "He did not care, 
he would talk ;" and immediately commenced, by expressing 
his belief in the existence and unity of God. The conversa- 
tion was continued till the principal doctrines were conversed 
upon, (viz : the existence and unity of God ; divinity of 
Christ ; personality and'influences of the Holy Spirit ; primi- 
tive state of man ; original sin ; atonement ; regeneration ; 
perseverance of the saints ; election ; translation of the Bible ; 
principles of exegesis ; and some other subjects.) 

Ques. 27. Does not witness remember, that during his visit 
to New Orleans in April 1830, he expressed the opinion to 
Mr. Maybin that the accused was not a man of veracity ? 

Arts. Witness does not recollect distinctly of using those 
words, but he does remember saying to Mr. Maybin, or 
some other person or persons, that he had not confidence in 
Mr. Clapp's statements. As well as witness now recollects, 
the remark, whether made to Mr. Maybin or others, had re- 
ference to the statement of the accused in his own house 
in the morning, viz : " That no one pretended to bring Scrip- 
ture to prove the divinity of Christ." And when we con- 
versed on that subject again, in Mr. Maybin's office, the same 
day, he quoted Scripture in support of it, and denied that he 
had said in the morning " That no one pretended to bring 
Scripture to prove it." 



259 



Ques. 28. Does not witness remember, that during the con- 
versation between him and the accused, at his house in April 
1830, that the accused said that no intelligent person at this 
day attempted to prove the divinity of our Saviour, from the 
fact that the names of the Supreme Being are applied to him 
in the Scripture 1 

Ans. Yes ; witness has some recollection that the accused 
made a remark of that import, in addition to the others which 
he has already stated. 

Ques. 29. Where did witness first read the pastoral letter 
to the church in New Orleans ? 

Ans. In the session-room of the first Presbyterian church. 

Ques. 30. Does witness remember, that, during the remarks 
which the accused made after witness had finished reading 
the pastoral letter, the accused stated that he adopted the 
Confession of Faith by letter, at the meeting of the Missis- 
sippi Presbytery, when the accused was admitted to that 
body in October 1823 ; and that the accused had no recollec- 
tion of adopting it again at the subsequent meeting of the 
Presbytery held in April 1824 ? 

Ans. No ; to the best of my recollection the accused de- 
nied that he ever had adopted it ; and stated that he could 
not have done it, because he was received by letter when ab- 
sent. 

Ques. 31. Does not witness remember that the accused 
stated in the session-room, when the pastoral letter was read, 
that he had been ordained pastor of that church by the Hamp- 
shire Association of Massachusetts ; and that he never had 
been, as the Presbytery had supposed, a stated supply ; and 
that the Presbytery had attempted to dissolve a connection 
which never existed ? 

Ans. The accused stated on that occasion that he was li- 
censed and ordained by the Hampshire County Association 
in Massachusetts, from which he had never been dismissed, 
and to which he then belonged ; and ridiculed the idea of the 
Presbytery " declaring the church vacant" when an orthodox 
congregational minister was seated over it as pastor. Wit- 
ness stated to the church in reply, that there was Mr. Clapp's 



260 



letter before them, addressed to the moderator of the Pres- 
bytery requesting his dismission, which seemed to imply that 
he considered himself a member of the Presbytery. There 
was also before them a declaration of the Presbytery that he 
was a member of that body ; and whether both parties were 
deceived or not, witness would leave for the church to judge. 

Ques. 32. Does not witness remember that, during and sub- 
sequently to reading the pastoral letter, he, witness, was great- 
ly agitated ? 

Ans. Witness does not recollect any such thing. He well 
remembers he thought himself remarkably composed on that 
occasion. Several persons remarked to him immediately af- 
ter, that " when Mr. Clapp flatly contradicted what witness 
stated, they were surprised that he was so little moved." This 
very remark was made to witness but a few days ago by one 
of the friends of the accused in this city. 

Ques. 33. Does not witness remember that I stated in the 
session-room, when the pastoral letter was read, that the Pres- 
bytery could not in justice say they had been kept in igno- 
rance of my views, because I had what seemed to me good 
evidence that my confidential letters to the Rev. George Potts 
on my theological views had been privately communicated to 
some members of the Presbytery ? 

Jlns. Witness does not recollect that the accused said any 
thing about "justice" He stated to the church that the Pres- 
bytery had known all his changes of opinion, from time to 
time, as they took place ; that he had communicated his views 
very fully to Mr. Potts in a written correspondence, which he 
considered the same as addressed to the Presbytery. He did 
not intimate, on that occasion, that he considered that corres- 
pondence confidential ; but, on the contrary, it seemed to be 
the design of his remarks to convey the idea that he expected 
Mr. Potts to communicate the views he there expressed to 
the other members of the Presbytery. He had alluded to 
that correspondence at his own house in the morning, and ap- 
plied many opprobrious epithets to Mr. Potts for betraying, as 
he said, the confidence which he had reposed in him in mak- 
ing those communications. I assured him then that I had no 



261 



knowledge of Mr. Potts' having shewn any part of that con- 
fidential correspondence between them ; and yet, in the 
evening of the very same day, he represented his views as all 
known to the Presbytery, because communicated to Mr. Potts 
in that correspondence which he had told me in the morning 
was confidential. 

Ques. 34. When did witness become a member of the 
Mississippi Presbytery ? 

Arts. I was licensed by the Mississippi Presbytery in 1820, 
and received as a member after ordination at the spring meet- 
ing in 1825. 

Ques. 35. Did witness have any conversation with the ac- 
cused on his views of theology between the meeting of the 
Presbytery in New Orleans, April 1827, and their meeting at 
Port Gibson in April 1828 ? 

Ans. None, that witness recollects, during that time. 

Ques. 36. Did witness attend the meeting of the Presbyte- 
ry in New Orleans in April 1827 ? 

Ans. Yes. 

Ques. 37. Will witness state whether he had at that meet- 
ing any conversation with the accused about the sense in which 
the accused understood the Confession of Faith ? 

Ans. Witness does not recollect of having any. 

Ques. 38. Does witness remember having at that meeting 
in New Orleans, April 1827, any conversation with the ac- 
cused about the Book of Discipline. 

Ans. No. 

Ques. 39. Does witness remember of having heard, a few 
weeks subsequently to the meeting in New Orleans April 1827, 
that the accused continued to preach against the doctrines 
contained in the Confession of Faith ? 

Ans. Witness has often heard such rumours. He recol- 
lects that some information of that kind was communicated 
to the Presbytery during the meeting at which the pastoral 
letter was written ; and such rumours have been frequently 
heard from that time to this. 

Ques. 40. Did witness attend the meeting of the Presbytery 
at Union church in the autumn of 1828 ? 



262 



Ans. Yes. 

Ques. 41. Does witness remember of having any conversa- 
tion with the accused, during the meeting of the Presbytery at 
Union church 1828, concerning the accused preaching against 
the Confession of Faith ? 

Arts. None that he recollects. 

Ques. 42. Does witness recollect conversing with me on 
my theological views in this city during the spring of 1829? 

Ans. I do not recollect being in the city that year. 

Ques. 43. Was witness present at the meeting of the Pres- 
bytery at Pisgah church in April 1830 ? 

Ans. Yes. 

Ques. 44. Will witness state whether he has ever seen, in 
any communication from the accused to the Mississippi Pres- 
bytery, the following language : " That Mr. Clapp considers 
" that the peace and prosperity of the Presbyterian church re- 
" quire his separation from it ?" 

Ans. The language of Mr. Clapp's letter of March 5th, 
1830, addressed to the moderator of the Mississippi Presbytery, 
is the following, viz. " I wish to withdraw from the Presbytery 
" simply because it seems to me that the peace and prosperi- 
" ty of your church in Louisiana and Mississippi require it." 

Ques. 45. Will witness state whether he knows what was 
the object of appointing the Committee of investigation at 
Port Gibson in October last, of which the Rev. George Potts 
was chairman ? 

Ans. Witness believes the appointment was made in pre- 
sence of the accused, and if he does not recollect the object, 
a reference to our records will probably show. 

Ques. 46. Was witness present at the meeting of the Pres- 
bytery at the Institution of Learning, January 25th, 1832 ? 

Ans. Yes, he was present. 

Ques. 47. Did the chairman of the Committee of investi- 
gation make a report at this meeting ; and did witness hear 
it? 

Ans. He did : and witness heard it. 

Ques. 48. Did witness, at that meeting, hear the Rev. George 
Potts read any letters addressed by the accused to the said 



263 



Rev. George Potts as chairman of the Committee of investiga- 
tion ? 

Ans. I did hear the chairman read such letters. 
Ques. 49. by the moderator. Has the witness any further 
testimony to offer for or against the accused ? 
Ans. Nothing more. 

Ques. 50. by the accused, by permission. Does witness re- 
member whether the part of the letter written by Mr. Hugh 
Farrie of this city to the Rev. George Potts, in which said Mr. 
Farrie gave it as his opinion that I would, to effect a settle- 
ment of the difficulties between me and the Mississippi Pres- 
bytery, subscribe to the Confession of Faith or Mahometan 
creed, was a subject of conversation between witness and any 
member of the Mississippi Presbytery at Port Gibson in Oc- 
tober last ? 

Ans. Witness has no recollection of hearing that letter 
spoken of at Port Gibson, except at the time when it was 
first mentioned that the Committee had proposed written 
questions to Mr. Clapp for him to answer. It created a smile, 
and some one remarked, " We shall see now how far Mr. 
Fame's observation will prove true." That is the only refe- 
rence that I now recollect to have heard made to that letter 
at Port Gibson. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in presence 
of the parties, and approved, and the witness discharged. 

Resolved, that we adjourn to meet to-morrow morning at 
half past 8 o'clock. Concluded with prayer. 

BENJ. CHASE, Clerk. 

Wednesday, New Orleans, May 16th, 1832. 

Presbytery met according to adjournment, and opened with 
prayer. Present as before, except the Rev. Theodore Clapp. 
Minutes of last session were read. 

Being no other business before the Presbytery, the Com- 
mittee of prosecution gave notice, that they were ready to 
introduce the written documents referred to in the list of wit- 
nesses accompanying the charges, as farther testimony, viz. 



264 



two letters from the Rev. Theodore Clapp ; one dated " New 
Orleans, August 10th, 1831," addressed to " Rev. George 
Potts, Natchez ;" and the other dated " New Orleans, October 
27th, 1831," addressed to " Mr. Hugh Farrie, present," both 
of which letters were read, and the following extract from 
them recorded as testimony on the part of the Committee 
of prosecution : viz. from the former letter, of " August LOth, 
1831," the accused states, " Knowing that the decisions of the 
Presbytery might be sustained by the General Assembly, I 
had prepared for publication on the subject, what would 
serve to fill a pamphlet, in the octavo form, of 300 pages. 
Had the decision of the General Assembly been against 
me, it would have been published this month. I rejoice 
that it is not yet necessary to do it ; not on my own account, 
for I still think that the publication would do me a great 
deal of good, but because it necessarily contains something 
which would be gratifying to the enemies of religion. The 
above-mentioned manuscripts are, as it seems to me, a faith- 
ful and correct exhibition of all matters appertaining to the 
Presbyterian church in the states of Louisiana and Missis- 
sippi for the last ten years. For such a work I have mate- 
rials of which you are not aware, enabling me to draw a 
pretty exact portrait, not only of things, but also of persons. 
My only object in preparing it was self-defence ; that I 
might convince the American people of the purity of my 
motives, character, and conduct ; and that I might leave to 
my children the legacy of a bright unsullied reputation. I 
have not shown the manuscript to an individual, not even 
to my wife ; and if the Presbytery do me justice, respecting 
which I have no doubt, it shall never see the light ; it shall 
be consigned to the flames that it may never fall into the 
hands of our enemies. To them it would be a feast indeed. 
I do think, Sir, that you and I both have cause to be thank- 
ful for the late decision of the General Assembly. I hate 
religious warfare ; I attack no one, but must defend myself. 
I do not boast ; but will say, with respect to any contest into 
which I may be forced, that, though I may not come out of 
it entirely unscathed, — 



265 



1 Who conquers me, shall find a stubborn foe.' 

u In case of a fight, 

£ Our men in buckram shall have blows enough, 

c And find they too are penetrable stuff.' Byron. 

" (Forgive the above ebullition of parson Clapp's folly.) I 
am not able to account for the distrust and suspicion, with 
respect to my integrity and piety, that have apparently been 
excited in the minds of many of the Presbytery. It would 
oblige me exceedingly to be informed on this subject. What 
have you seen in me that justifies a suspicion as to my sin- 
cerity ? I am told that you reason in this way, — my subscrip- 
tion to the Confession of Faith was insincere, and he who 
can practise insincerity on a subject so sacred, must want 
common honesty. I admit the conclusion, but deny, most 
positively, the premises. I have never made a false statement 
of my doctrinal views, either in or out of the pulpit, since I 
have been a preacher of the Gospel. Again, I am told that 
you think my general style of preaching contradicts the sen- 
timents which I avow to the Presbytery. If such be your 
opinion, allow me to say it is entirely erroneous. Why do 
you think so ? Is it because you have been told so ? Dr. Mil- 
ler, in his letters on clerical manners, makes the following re- 
marks : * It is almost incredible how little reliance can be 

* placed on reports circulated even by good people, accompa- 

* nied by all the minute circumstances of time and place ; and 
' how utterly unsafe it is to investigate their truths, because 
' an investigation cannot be conducted without repeating 
' the story and giving additional currency." (See page 95th.) 
Now I fear you have relied too much on such reports. I have 
traced several reports as to my preaching, doctrines, and con- 
duct, in which there is not a particle of truth, to some of the 
following persons, — Messrs. Rollins, Ross, Farrie, Caldwell ; 
and to Madams Hearsey and Hill. Now, if you knew what 
I know, you would not credit what they say. If I am per- 
mitted to have a conversation with you, I will convince you 
that the opposition of the above-named persons is to be as- 
cribed to iniquity, gross iniquity, which is not known publicly, 



266 



and I hope never will be till the day of judgment. I can- 
not put what I allude to on paper, and I make this communi- 
cation in confidence. I can convince you that from those per- 
sons I have suffered immensely, and in silence, because I do 
not wish to injure the cause of religion. 

" This is a strange world, and my circumstances have, per- 
haps, enabled me to see more of it than you have ; at any 
rate I have taken a deeper view of things in this place than 
you are aware of. Let me put you on your guard as to Mr. 
Silas Hazard. He means well doubtless ; but his nearest re- 
lations and best friends admit, that, for some reason or other, 
he is extremely apt to misunderstand and misreport what he 
has heard in conversation. 

" I shall keep a copy of this letter, not because I distrust 
you in the least, but for fear this may not reach you. I in- 
tended to have touched on many other topics, but will weary 
you no more at present. If I should not be at the Presbyte- 
ry, in consequence of any unforeseen occurrence, (sickness or 
death,) I beg of you the favour to carry this letter to the Pres- 
bytery, and read it to them, (excepting the confidential part 
about Caldwell and others ;) show this to none. And I beg 
of you also to give it an attentive perusal, and let me know 
what are my errors and faults, that I may reform. I confide 
in you, &c." 

The following is an extract from the letter addressed to 
Mr. Hugh Farrie by the accused in reference to the forego- 
ing extracts, viz. 

" New Orleans, October 27, 1831. 
" Sir. — It is a false assertion, that, in my letter to Mr. Potts, 
a part of which (as you say) was read to Mr. Ross, I gave 
the names of six individuals, whose characters were such that 
their testimony ought not to be received against me. It is a 
false assertion that that letter contains a charge against your 
character, or the character of any professor of religion in 
this city. For proof of the above declarations I appeal to the 
letter itself, now in Mr. Potts' possession. He has my per- 
mission to send you an entire copy of it ; I hope he will do 



26? 



k. The false impression, I suppose, arose from a miscon* 
struction of the following language : * that I believed I could 
' convince Mr. Potts in a private interview (I did not wish to 
1 do it on paper) that the opposition to which you and some 
' others now belong, originated in gross iniquity. 1 I did not 
mean to say or insinuate that the iniquity was to be imputed 
to you or Mr. Ross, or the other persons named ; but that the 
opposition to me in this city was commenced by malicious re- 
ports against my orthodoxy and character. You, perhaps, 
remember that my enemies reported, before my first visit to 
this place, that I was a Unitarian, &c. You remember all 
that was said against me by Levi Beebee, General Whittle* 
sey, Mrs. Woodrow, and many others, especially Mr. Moses 
Cox. Now, I have never said or insinuated that you were 
a bad man, nor that you were not a Christian, a gentleman, 
and a man of integrity ; but I simply declared my belief 
that your unfavourable impressions as to my orthodoxy have 
been produced by the unrighteous efforts of my enemies, and 
perhaps some other incidental circumstances. I have never 
doubted your honesty, your upright motives, in the course 
adopted by you. I may express the belief that you are under 
the influence of prejudice without assaulting your character^ 
because no individual, however great or good, is entirely ex- 
empt from the operations of that malign principle. 

" I have never made any objections to your giving testis 
mony, either for or against me, before the Presbytery, accord- 
ing to your sense of truth and duty. My written Confession 
of Faith was exhibited to the Presbytery at their late meet- 
ing ; it was given to a Committee for inspection. This Com- 
mittee reported that there was nothing in my sentiments 
which rendered it improper for me to continue to be a minis- 
ter and member of the Presbyterian church. The report was 
accepted by a unanimous vote. Several members told me 
that the New School of Presbyterians, to which I belong, had 
a decided majority in the General Assembly. I have also 
obtained a certificate from the body that ordained me, — that I 
was not ordained as an evangelist, but as pastor of the first 
Presbyterian church in New Orleans ; and at their written re- 

36 



268 



quest and consent. Such a certificate, Mr. Potts told me, 
would put the matter forever at rest ; so that there is now a 
first Presbyterian church in our city, and I am its unworthy 
pastor. Those who do not choose to worship with us, can 
form a second Presbyterian church. The Presbytery is re- 
solved to countenance no farther opposition to me and my 
church. Sir, I do not wish to consider you as an enemy. I 
have never intentionally injured you, in person, property, or 
reputation." 

On motion, resolved, that we appoint a Committee, consist- 
ing of two persons, to wait on the Rev. T. Clapp, and inquire 
into the reason of his non-attendance at the Presbytery this 
morning. Rev. Messrs. Wm. Montgomery and J. R. Hutchi- 
son were appointed that Committee. 

The Committee appointed to wait on the Rev. T. Clapp and 
inquire into the reason of his absence this morning, reported 
that they had called at his house, and were informed that he 
was sick in bed and asleep. 

Whereupon, on motion, resolved that, in consideration of 
the indisposition of the accused, we have a recess until 11 
o'clock. 

Eleven o'clock, A. M. 
The Presbytery resumed business ; and the accused still 
being absent, the following preamble and resolutions were 
adopted, viz. 

Whereas, the Rev. T. Clapp has not yet appeared, resolved 
that the former Committee, with the addition of the Rev. J. B. 
Warren, be re-appointed to wait on him, and ascertain whether 
he will nominate any particular member of this Judicatory to 
manage his cause. And further resolved, that, to give time 
to Mr. Clapp to inform the Presbytery on this subject through 
the Committee, we have a recess until 4 o'clock, P. M. 

Four o^clock, P. M. 
The Presbytery resumed business. The Committee ap- 
pointed to wait on Mr. T. Clapp presented the following re- 
port, viz. 



269 



The Committee appointed to wait on Mr. Clapp report* 
that they called at his house, but were not admitted to him, 
being informed that he did not wish to be disturbed. 

They then sent in to him the copy of the Minute of the 
Presbytery with which they were entrusted ; and it was 
shortly after returned to them, with a note from Mr. Clapp, 
informing them that he was sick and could not attend the 
Presbytery to-day, but hopes he will be able to appear to- 
morrow. 

WILLIAM MONTGOMERY, > Committee> 
JOHN R. HUTCHISON, > 

The following preamble and resolutions were offered, ac- 
cepted, and adopted, viz. 

Whereas the Committee of prosecution have introduced a 
letter from the Rev. Theodore Clapp to the Rev. George Potts, 
as testimony against the said Rev. T. Clapp, which appears to 
contain an injunction of secrecy in relation to part of it ; and 
whereas the Rev. George Potts is not present to show why he 
divulged the confidential part ; therefore resolved that the 
Committee of prosecution be, and they are hereby directed 
to furnish the Presbytery forthwith with any information on 
that subject which may be in their possession. 

Whereupon the Committee produced the following extract 
from the copy of a letter from the Rev. George Potts, in an- 
swer to the Rev. T. Clapp, above referred to, of August 10, 
1831, which is as follows, viz. 

"Natchez, September -.15, 1831. 

" Rev. T. Clapp. 

" Dear Sir. — I had intended to notice in full the contents 
of your last letter of August 10th, but indisposition and ab- 
sence delayed me ; and in the mean time, reflecting on the 
subject, I concluded that any remark of mine was unneces- 
sary. The tenor of the letter is such, especially the threat 
contained in the latter part of it, that I scarcely^ feel justified 
to myself in taking even this notice of it. I shall comply with 
your wish, and will show the letter, the whole letter, to the 
members of the Presbytery. I say the whole letter, for 1 



270 



cannot consent to become the depository of confidential ac- 
cusations against persons, some of whom I value as friends; 
and Christians. The relative circumstances in which we are 
placed, seem, in my view, to preclude the propriety of confi- 
dential communication upon any points or in relation to 
any persons connected with the general subject. Since the 
matter came before the Presbytery, I have not regarded 
our correspondence as confidential. You are at liberty to 
make use of my communications in full ; and I feel myself at 
liberty to do the same with yours. However, under other 
circumstances, I should value your correspondence, in this 
case the feelings of private friendship cannot exist well in di- 
rect opposition to the feelings of conscientious regard to the 
injured interests of our church and the cause of religion, both 
of which demand reparation. A sincere desire for your best 
temporal and spiritual welfare warms my heart, and you 
have my poor prayers. This is entirely consistent with the 
full determination on my part to exert every faculty I have 
in the protection of what I deem the cause of God's truth.* 

Thursday, New Orleans, May 17, 1832. 
The following communication, addressed to the moderator, 
was received from the Rev. Theodore Clapp through the Rev* 
J. B. Warren : viz. 

" Mr. Clapp begs leave to inform the Presbytery that his 
sickness renders it impracticable for him to be present at the 
meeting of that body this morning. He asks their indulgence 
a day or two longer, when he hopes to be able to attend. In 
reply to the request of the Presbytery, that he would designate 
some person to conduct his defence during his sickness and 
absence, he can only say that he wishes to be permitted to 
manage his own cause. 

"J. B. WARREN, by request of Mr. Clapp. 

tt Thursday morning." 

On motion, resolved, that we have a recess for fifteen mi- 
nutes* 



271 



After recess the Presbytery resumed business, when a let- 
ter was received from the Rev. T. Clapp, addressed to the 
moderator, which is as follows : viz. 

" To the moderator of the Mississippi Presbytery. 

" Dear Sir. — In consequence of severe indisposition, and 
the absence of Mr. Potts and other important witnesses, who 
cannot at present be obtained, I am constrained to request 
that my trial should be postponed to a future time, which shall 
be designated by the Presbytery. 

" T. CLAPP. 

" New Orleans, 11 th May, 1832." 

Whereupon, resolved, that the foregoing letter of the Rev. 
T. Clapp be put into the hands of a Committee to draft a 
minute in relation to it. The Rev. Messrs. Hazard, Blair, and 
William Montgomery, were appointed that Committee. 

The Committee to whom was referred the letter of the 
Rev. T. Clapp, requesting a postponement of his trial now 
pending, reported the following preamble and resolutions, 
which were accepted and adopted : viz. 

" Whereas the Rev. T. Clapp is still indisposed, and unable 
to attend to the management of his cause ; and whereas he 
represents to the Presbytery that important witnesses in his- 
case are absent, whose attendance cannot be procured at this 
meeting, (particularly the Rev. G. Potts, who is now at Phila- 
delphia, and will not probably return till July ;) and whereas 
Mr. Clapp, on these grounds, requests the postponement of 
his trial, therefore 

" Resolved, that his request be granted, and the further pro- 
ceedings in his trial be postponed till the last Wednesday of 
July next, at 1 1 o'clock, A. M. at Friendship church, East Feli- 
ciana, Louisiana, and that the Presbytery have an adjourned 
meeting at that time and place. 

"Resolved, also, that it be the duty of the temporary clerk 
to notify the accused of the above time and place, when and 



272 



where the further consideration of his case will be resumed, 
that he may appear there and then with his witnesses. 

"S. H. HAZARD, } 

"W. C. BLAIR, [Committee." 

"W. MONTGOMERY,) 

On motion, resolved, that we adjourn to meet at Friendship 
church the last Wednesday in July next, at 11 o'clock A. M. 
Concluded with prayer, singing, and the Apostolic benedic- 
tion. 

JOHN H. VANCOURT, Moderator. 
BENJAMIN CHASE, Clerk. 

Friendship Church, July 25, 1832. 

The Presbytery met according to adjournment. 

Minutes of last session were read. The temporary clerk 
was called upon to state whether he had duly notified the Rev. 
Theodore Clapp of the time and place for the present session 
of the Presbytery ; he reported compliance. 

An anonymous letter was received, addressed to the mode- 
rator, purporting to be from the Rev. Theodore Clapp ; which 
letter, after being read, was placed in the hands of a Com- 
mittee to report what notice should be taken of it. The Rev. 
Messrs. Chase and Blair were appointed that Committee. 

On motion, resolved, that we have a recess for fifteen mi- 
nutes. 

After recess, resumed business, when the Committee ap- 
pointed to take the anonymous letter into consideration pre- 
sented the following report ; viz. 

The Committee appointed to take the anonymous letter 
under consideration, purporting to be from the Rev. Theodore 
Clapp, submit the following report : 

" That, upon examination of the letter, they recommend its 
reception by the Presbytery as a genuine letter from the Rev. 
Theodore Clapp, for the following reasons : viz. 

" 1. The hand- writing corresponds with Mr. Clapp's other 
letters now in possession of the Presbytery. 

" 2. John Potts, Esq. informed the moderator that he re- 



/ 



273 



ceived it from Mr. Clapp, with the request that he would sub- 
scribe and transmit it to him. 

"3. The facts mentioned in the letter are such as are ap- 
plicable to no other individual ; and the presumption is, that 
the signature was omitted through inadvertency. 

« BENJ. CHASE, } n . „ 
«W. C. BLAIR, J Committee." 

This report was accepted and adopted, and the letter is as 
follows ; viz. 

" On board steamer Chesapeake, a few miles below 
" Natchez, July 9, 1832. 
"To the moderator of the Mississippi Presbytery. 

" Rev. and Dear Sir. — Unforeseen occurrences have call- 
ed me away from my people, at such a time, and to such a 
distance, as to render it impossible for me to attend the next 
stated meeting of the Presbytery. I hope, therefore, that at 
the adjourned meeting to be held the last Wednesday of this 
month, you will propose to put off the further prosecution of 
the process commenced against me till some day next autumn 
or winter. The chief reason for leaving at this point of time, 
is the state of my wife's health. She is exceedingly enervated 
by the effect of the heat and assiduous attentions to her child- 
ren, the youngest of whom is about four months old. We 
determined in the spring, if possible, to spend the summer in 
New Orleans, but Providence has been pleased to order other- 
wise. It is our calculation to pass most of the time, dur- 
ing which we shall be absent, at the Harrodsburg Springs in 
Kentucky. My wife, in union with me, has not left the city 
since 1827. We both go up the river reluctantly, and only 
from a sense of duty. All our children are with us. I take 
the liberty to present through you to the Mississippi Presby- 
tery, the petition that they would put off the further prosecu- 
tion of my trial till some day posterior to the middle of No- 
vember next ; I intend to return to New Orleans the fore part 
of the above-mentioned month. I am as anxious as any one 
can be to have my trifd issued, but cannot feel it justifiable to 



274 



sacrifice to this object the health and happiness of my family. 
I know you will be willing to grant me all reasonable indul- 
gence and favour ; more, I trust, I do not ask. It is my prayer 
that the Presbytery may deal with me so as to promote the 
glory of God, viz. (the peace and unity of the church in this 
part of Zion.) The steam-boat is getting under way, and shakes 
so much that I must stop writing. You will confer on me an 
especial favour by addressing me a letter as soon as you re- 
ceive this, directed to Louisville, Kentucky, where I expect to 
tarry some days to visit my wife's relations. 

" I am, dear Sir, your brother, in the hope of a 
" glorious immortality through Christ. 
" Rev. J. H. Vancourt, moderator of the Mississippi Pres- 
bytery. 

" P. S. My health is good. God has been infinitely kind to 
me and mine. Our most respectful compliments to Mrs. 
Vancourt." 

On motion, resolved, that a Committee of three be appoint- 
ed to prepare a minute with regard to the course to be pur- 
sued in relation to Mr. Clapp. The Rev. Messrs. Blair, Hutch- 
ison, and Mr. Watson, were appointed that Committee. 

Resolved, that we adjourn till to-morrow morning at nine 
o'clock. Concluded with prayer. 

Thursday, July 26, 1832. 

Presbytery met according to adjournment. 

The Committee appointed to prepare a minute with regard 
to the course to be pursued in relation to Mr. Clapp, present- 
ed a report which was accepted. 

Resolved, that the further consideration of the report pre- 
sented by the Committee on Mr Clapp's case, be postponed 
for the present ; and that we have a recess 'until after divine 
service. 

After recess the Presbytery resumed business, and proceed- 
ed to the consideration of the report of the Committee in re- 
lation to Mr. Clapp, which, after amendment, was adopted, 
and is as follows, viz : 



275 



The Committee appointed to prepare a minute respecting 
the course to be pursued in relation to Mr. Clapp, beg leave 
to present the following view of facts preparatory to recom- 
mending the measure to be adopted. 

In May last the Presbytery held an adjourned meeting 
in the city of New Orleans, for the purpose of investigating 
charges of error in doctrine and deportment preferred against 
the Rev. Theodore Clapp, and spent two weeks in taking testi- 
mony in the case ; but before the trial was brought to an issue, 
Mr. Clapp requested that, in consequence of severe indispo- 
sition, and the absence of Mr. Potts and other important 
witnesses, his trial should be postponed to some future time, 
which should be designated by the Presbytery. In compli- 
ance with his request, the Presbytery adjourned to meet at 
this time and place ; and having convened to proceed with 
the trial, find that the Rev. George Potts has returned from 
the North, even at the risk of his own health and that of his 
family (one of his children being very feeble, and recently 
convalescent from dangerous illness), in order to afford the 
testimony required by the accused. Mr. Clapp, however, 
fails to appear ; and an anonymous letter, dated the 9th inst. 
and purporting to be from him, is received, addressed to 
the moderator, and stating that he is on a journey to Ken- 
tucky, in good health, and praying for a future postponement 
of his trial to a distant period. For making this request, and 
leaving the country so nearly at the time appointed for bring- 
ing his trial to an issue, he assigns no other reason than that 
" his wife was exceedingly enervated by the heat and assi. 
duous attention to her children." 

Mr. Clapp was well aware that many of the members of 
the Presbytery were obliged to travel 300 miles to attend his 
trial in New Orleans, and that they would now be called 
again to a great distance from their families and congrega- 
tions for the same object. His departure, under these circum- 
stances, seems to indicate a disregard to the interests of the 
church, as well as to the importance of bringing his trial to a 

37 



\ 



276 

close. The Committee therefore recommend the adoption 
of the following preamble and resolutions, viz : 

Whereas the Rev. Theodore Clapp is under process on 
charges of dangerous errors in doctrine and immoral conduct, 
the issuing of which was postponed at his request, and is now 
desired to be farther delayed. And whereas the discipline 
of our church (chap. iv. sec. 18. and chap. v. sec. 2. and 14,) 
authorises the suspension of persons under process in such 
cases ; therefore, for the purpose of guarding the interests of 
the church against the injury which must evidently be sus- 
tained by Mr. Clapp's continuing to exercise his ministerial 
functions at home and abroad under charges of such a cha- 
racter as those preferred against him ; unanimously 

Resolved, I. That the Rev. Theodore Clapp be, and he is 
hereby suspended from the work of the ministry until his case 
shall be regularly issued. 

Resolved, 2. That it be the duty of the temporary clerk to 
transmit to Mr. Clapp, without delay, a copy of these resolu- 
tions and the accompanying preamble ; and also to notify 
him of the time and place to which we adjourn, and where 
the further consideration of his case will again be resumed. 

Friday, July 26, 1832. 
Resolved, that we adjourn to meet at Pine Ridge, the second 
Wednesday in December next, at 11 o'clock P. M. Con- 
cluded with singing and prayer. 

J. H. VANCOURT, Moderator. 
BEN J. CHASE, Clerk. 

Pine Ridge, December l%th, 1832. 
The Presbytery met according to adjournment; opened 
with prayer ; proceeded to read the minutes, &e. ; adjourned 
to meet in this place to-morrow morning, 8 o'clock. Con- 
cluded with prayer. 

December 13th, 1832. 
The Presbytery met according to adjournment ; opened 
with prayer ; resumed the reading of the minutes. 



277 



Resolved, that, at the request of Mr. Clapp, the pronoun 
** he," in the testimony of Mrs. Southmayd, be erased, and 
" they" substituted in the place of it, as it is evidently an error 
of the transcriber. 

Resolved, to have a recess until one o'clock. 

After recess resumed business. 

Resolved, that the Presbytery pass from a common to a 
judicial capacity, and resume the consideration of Mr. Clapp's 
case. 

The moderator solemnly announced from the chair that the 
body was about to pass to the consideration of the business 
assigned for trial ; and enjoined on the members to recollect 
and regard their high character as judges of a court of Jesus 
Christ, and the solemn duty in which they were about to act. 

The Rev. James Smylie was introduced as a witness by 
the accused, and being duly sworn, testified as follows, viz : 

Ques. 1. Will witness please to state whether he recollects 
of having had any conversation with the accused at Port Gib- 
son in October 1831, respecting the theological views of the 
accused ? 

Ans. Witness recollects that some remarks were made upon 
that subject, but does not recollect all the particular topics of 
the conversation. 

Ques. 2. Will witness please to state where this conver- 
sation between him and the accused took place ? 

Ans. Near the Methodist church, and on the way to Mr. 
Carpenter's according to witness's best recollection. 

Ques. 3. Does the witness recollect conversing with the ac- 
cused at Mr. Carpenter's, in company with Mr. Potts, on the 
difference between the Calvinistic and Arminian views of 
election ? 

Ans. Witness does not recollect. 

Ques. 4. Does witness recollect of conversing with the ac- 
cused at Port Gibson respecting the suspicions entertained by 
witness and some of his brethren as to the accused being do- 
ficient in sincerity ? 

Ans. Witness does recollect that a conversation upon 



278 



that subject took place. Witness had made remarks in the 
Presbytery on the subject of distrusting the sincerity of the 
accused, and was called to order. The object of the witness 
in making those remarks, was to divulge to the accused that 
a distrust did really exist, but, being precluded from doing this 
in the presence of the Presbytery, he called on the accused 
privately, and disclosed to him his own distrust, and, so far as 
he apprehended, the distrust of some of the other brethren. 

Ques. 5. Will witness state whether he recollects of hearing 
it said by any members of the Presbytery at Port Gibson, that 
the first set of interrogatories offered by the chairman of the 
Committee ought not to be accepted, on the ground that the 
answers to them were not sufficiently explicit ? 

Ans. Witness does not recollect. 

Ques. 6. Was not witness at the Presbytery at Port Gibson 
when the chairman of the Committee appointed to confer with 
the accused presented his first report to the Presbytery ; and did 
not witness hear the chairman of said Committee read a part 
of the first set of questions propounded to the accused with 
their answers ? 

Ans. Witness recollects that the chairman announced his 
readiness to report, but, as well as witness recollects, he did 
not read the report ; but read some of the first questions and 
answers appended, mixing this reading with much of his own 
conversation. 

Ques. 7. Will witness state whether there is a rule in this 
Presbytery that no verbal reports of a Committee shall be ac- 
cepted under any circumstances ? 

Jlns. Witness does not recollect of any statute rule but such 
as is established by common practice. 

Ques. 8. Does not witness remember, that when the chair- 
man of the Committee of conference presented his first re- 
port, he commenced it by reading some written document ? 

Ans. Witness recollects, that when standing in the attitude 
of a reporter, he had some papers in his hand ; and, after 
making a number of remarks, he proceeded to read and was 
interrupted. 



279 



Ques, 9. Will witness state whether any reasons were as- 
signed for arresting the farther reading of the report, and what 
they were ? 

Ans % Witness would state, in answer to this question, that 
some of the reasons he heard assigned for interrupting the 
chairman in reading the papers which he held in his hand, were, 
first : that the chairman mixed his conversation with his read- 
ing. Secondly : that it appeared the answer to the questions 
were in pencil marks, and subject to be defaced ; and, more- 
over, that no signature was appended to the answers. There 
might have been other reasons assigned, but witness does not 
recollect them. 

Ques. 10. Will witness state if he remembers how it ap- 
peared that the answers to some of the questions were in pen- 
cil mark, and whether witness saw at that time the first set of 
interrogatories propounded to the accused ? 

Ans. Witness would state that he saw the paper purporting 
to contain the interrogatories in the hands of the chairman, 
and saw the pencil marks, and he has no doubt but they were 
the first interrogatories ; but he did not read them at that time, 
having had but a glance of them. 

Ques. 11. Will witness state whether the reading of the 
papers offered by the chairman of the Committee of confe- 
rence as his first report was arrested by a regular vote of the 
Presbytery ? 

Ans. Witness does not recollect, but his impression is that 
they were taken back by the chairman himself. 

Ques. 12. Will witness state whether it is according to the 
rules of transacting business in this Presbytery, to consider 
the documents presented by the chairman of a Committee, as 
his report fairly before the Presbytery and subject to their 
order ? 

Ans. Witness would state, that as there is no statute rule on 
the subject, he is unable to answer more than merely giving 
his opinion. It is the opinion of the witness that all the docu- 
ments accepted by the Presbytery on the subject of a report, 
are fairly before the Presbytery and subject to their order ; 
but, until accepted, they are properly in the hands of the Com- 



280 



mittee : but, nevertheless, the Committee itself is subject to 
the Presbytery. 

Ques. 13. Will witness state whether it be consistent with 
the rules of business in this Presbytery to arrest the reading 
of papers by the chairman of a Committee who has com- 
menced his report, unless those papers were fairly before the 
Presbytery and subject to their order ? 

Ans. Witness does not feel himself called upon to answer 
so abstract a question. 

Ques. 14. Will witness state whether he has seen and ex- 
amined the first set of interrogatories, with their answers, pro- 
pounded to the accused by the Committee of conference at 
Port Gibson ? 

Ans. He has seen the first set of questions, but did not par- 
ticularly examine them ; he read them over cursorily in New 
Orleans, having had at Port Gibson but a glancing view of the 
same paper. 

Resolved, that we adjourn to meet at Mr. William Bisland's 
at 6 o'clock. Concluded with prayer. 

6 o'clock, P. M. 
The Presbytery met according to adjournment, opened 
with prayer, and proceeded to take the further testimony of 
Mr. Smylie : 

Ques. 15. Will witness state whether he remembers a con- 
versation with the accused at Port Gibson upon the subject 
of a letter from the accused to the Rev. George Potts, in 
which it was reported that the accused had slandered certain 
professors of religion in the city of New Orleans ? 

Ans. Witness does not recollect whether he has had a con- 
versation with the accused, or whether he has heard others 
have a conversation with him upon the subject of that letter. 
All that he is able to say is, that he has heard, or had a con- 
versation with him upon that subject at Port Gibson, when 
and where the impression was made upon witness's mind, by 
his conversation, that it was his object to hold forth the idea 



281 



that it was not his intention to impeach the characters of the 
persons named in said letter farther than being connected 
with a party opposed to him ; but who said party was, witness 
does not recollect that any mention was made. 

Ques. 16. Will witness state whether he remembers of 
having made the declaration to any member of the church in 
New Orleans, either verbally or by letter, that the accused, 
during the meeting of the Presbytery at Port Gibson in 1831, 
had declared his unqualified belief of all the distinguishing 
tenets of Calvinism, or what are commonly called the five 
points of Calvinism ? 

Ans. Witness does not recollect that he made the declara- 
tion in either way, but admits possibly he might, for he be- 
lieved it. Witness regarded the answers to the questions as 
amounting to such declaration on the part of the accused. 

The Committee of prosecution declined asking the witness 
any questions. 

Ques. 17. by the moderator. Will witness please to state 
the circumstances which attended the answering of the con- 
stitutional questions by the accused at Friendship church, where 
he first appeared in the Presbytery 1 

Ans. At the spring meeting of the Presbytery at Friendship 
church in 1824, witness and another member objected to Mr. 
Clapp's taking his seat as a member until testimony were pro- 
duced of his being a Presbyterian in doctrine and discipline. 
It was replied by others, that he had been received by letter 
and was entitled to a seat. A debate arose, and Mr. Clapp 
remarked, that perhaps he could remove the difficulties by 
answering such questions as might be proposed. The mode- 
rator, Mr. Hunter, then proposed what witness supposed to 
be the usual questions to Mr. Clapp, who, to the best of wit- 
ness's recollection, answered them in the affirmative. The 
regularity of Mr. Clapp's reception by letter when absent 
was considered questionable, and it was therefore deemed 
expedient not to enter this transaction upon the minutes, since 
he already stood recorded as a member. 



282 



Ques. 18. by the moderator. Does witness know whether 
there are any persons now living who were present in Friend- 
ship church during this transaction ? 

Ans. The Rev. William Montgomery, Samuel M. Simpson, 
Matthew J. Neely, Mrs. Elizabeth Fairbanks, and Matthew 
Smylie, were present and now living. 

Ques. 19. by the moderator. Has the witness any further 
testimony to offer, for or against the accused ? 

Ans. I do not recollect any thing further. 

Ques. 20. by the accused, by permission. Will witness state 
whether he recollects that, at the meeting of the Presbytery 
at Pisgah church, in April 1830, any other communication 
from the accused was read before the Presbytery except his 
letter addressed to the moderator, and dated New Orleans, 
March 5th, 1830 ? 

Ans. Witness does not positively recollect, but his impres- 
sion at present is, that there were two letters, or parts of two 
letters, read, addressed to the Rev. George Potts. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in presence 
of the parties, and approved, and the witness discharged. 

Resolved, that we adjourn to meet in the church to-morrow 
morning at 8 o'clock. Concluded with prayer. 

BENJ. CHASE, Clerk. 

December 14, 1832. 

The Presbytery met according to adjournment. 

A resolution was offered relating to the manner in which 
the Rev. Theodore Clapp had submitted to his sentence of 
suspension from the Gospel ministry, which, after some dis- 
cussion, was placed into the hands of a Committee to prepare 
a minute upon the subject. The Rev. George Potts and A. 
W. Putnam, Esq. were appointed that Committee. 

The Rev. Jacob Riskhow was introduced by the accused, 
and being duly qualified, deposed as follows, viz. 



Ques. 1. Does witness remember of having a conversation 



i 



283 



with the accused at Port Gibson in 1831, on the subject o£ 
the theological views of the accused ? 
Ans. I do not, 

Ques, 2. Will witness state what he knows of the transac- 
tions which took place between the Presbytery and the ac- 
cused at Port Gibson in October, 1831 ? 

Jlns. Witness recollects that some objections were made 
to the first report of the Committee of conference with Mr, 
Clapp, and it was not received ; but my recollection is very 
indistinct of the transaction. 

The Committee of prosecution declined cross examining 
the witness. 

Ques. by moderator. Have you any further testimony to 
offer, either for or against the accused ? 
Ans. I have not 

The above testimony was read to the witness in presence 
of the parties, and approved, and the witness discharged. 

The Rev. Peter H. Fullen wider was introduced by the ac- 
cused, and being duly sworn, testified as follows, viz. 

Ques. I. Will witness state what he knows of the transac- 
tions which took place between the Presbytery and the ac- 
cused at Port Gibson in October, 1831 ? 

Ans. Witness states that it is so general a question he can- 
not answer it very definitely. 

Ques. 2. Will witness state whether he remembers having 
heard any conversations at Port Gibson in October, 1831, 
concerning the theological views of the accused ? 

Ans. Witness believes that he did, but does not now dis- 
tinctly remember the particulars of those conversations. 

Ques. 3. Did witness hear doubts expressed as to the sin- 
cerity of the accused during that meeting ? 

Jlns* Witness did in the Presbytery, and not elsewhere. 
The doubt was expressed by the Rev. James Smylie. The 

38 



284 



particular occasion of the expression of this doubt he does not 
now remember. 

Ques. 4. Will witness state whether he remembers any- 
thing about the first and second reports of the chairman of 
the Committee of conference ? 

Ans. He does remember that the chairman of the Commit- 
tee, Mr. Donan, was about to report the result of the confe- 
rence of the Committee with the accused ; but when it ap- 
peared that said chairman was intermingling much of his own 
words with the report, and the Presbytery understanding that 
the report was written with a pencil, and also not having the 
signature of the accused to his answers to the questions pro- 
posed by the Committee, the Presbytery, I think, virtually ar- 
rested the reading of the report, and ordered the same Com- 
mittee to make a report entirely in writing, having the signa- 
ture of the accused appended to his answers. 

Ques. 5. Does witness remember that the members of the 
Presbytery expressed their satisfaction with the theological 
views of the accused as then exhibited to them ? 

Ans. To this, witness answers, some few members of the 
Presbytery did seem to express their satisfaction, but others 
were not entirely satisfied. 

Ques. 6. Does witness remember whether the first set of 
questions propounded to the accused by the Committee were 
read to the Presbytery ? 

Jlns. He does not think they were all, but thinks there were 
two or three read. 

Ques. 7. Will witness state what he knows about the se- 
cond report made to the Presbytery by the chairman of the 
Committee ? 

Jlns. Witness thinks that that report was accepted, and 
that it contained such propositions and answers as to include 
almost all the distinguishing tenets of Calvinism. 

CROSS EXAMINED BY THE COMMITTEE OF PROSECUTION. 

Ques. 8. Is witness certain that the reading of the first re- 
port of the chairman of the Committee was arrested by the 



285 



Presbytery, or merely interrupted by remarks made by mem- 
bers of the Presbytery ? 

Ans. He does not distinctly remember ; but in his answer 
to the question put by the accused, he only meant that the 
Committee, from what was said by members of the Presby- 
tery, or by the Presbytery, did not report at that time. 

Ques. 9. Was the first report of said Committee, or part of 
it, read ; or were the questions, or only part of the questions, 
appended to the report read at that time ? 

Ans. Witness is not certain that any report was read, but 
thinks that perhaps some part of a report was read, intermin- 
gled with remarks by the chairman ; but as to the questions, 
I think that two or three were read. 

Ques. 10. Does witness recollect whether the Committee 
of conference understood that they must bring in a report 
that needed no explanations, and which was to be in writing ? 

Ans. That is the opinion of witness. 

I 

Resolved, that we adjourn to meet immediately in the 
school-room. Concluded with prayer. 

Met according to adjournment, opened with prayer, and 
resumed business. 

Ques. 11. Were instructions given Presbyterially to this 
Committee in relation to the report which it was expected 
the Committee would bring in ? 

Ans. I am certain that some instructions were given, but I 
cannot say that they were given Presbyterially. 

Ques. 12. Does witness recollect whether the Committee 
of conference received formal instructions, or, in other words, 
instructions by a resolution of the Presbytery, in relation to 
their retaining and completing their report ; or did the chair- 
man of the Committee gather instructions from the remarks 
made by members ? 

Ans. I do not recollect. 

Ques. 13. by moderator. How long had you been an or- 
dained minister when you attended the meeting of the Pres^ 
bytery at Port Gibson ? 



286 



Jtn?* Almost a year. 

Ques. 14. by moderator. Have yoa any further testimony 
So offer, either for or against the accused ? 
<Ans« I recollect nothing material. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in presence 
of the parties, and approved, and the witness discharged. 

The Rev. Zebulon Butler was introduced by the accused? 
and being duly sworn, testified as follows, viz. 

Qws. L Will witness state whether he remembers of be- 
ing present with the accused and the Rev. Mr. Donan at the 
house of witness in Port Gibson in October, 1831, during si 
conversation between the accused, witness, and Mr. Donan,, 
one evening, concerning the topics of difference between what 
are termed the Old and New School^ and; other theological 
subjects ? 

Ans. I do. In that conversation he said nothing by which 
I could ascertain certainly whether he expressed his own 
views. The conversation was carried on in a very friendly 
manner. He expressed a desire that there should be a se- 
cond Presbyterian church in New Orleans ; and also pro- 
mised to befriend Mr. Donan in any exertion he should make 
in the cause of Christ in that city. Mr. Clapp advocated the 
self-determining power of the will, and totally disapproved of 
the work of President Edwards on the Will. I also recol- 
lect, that during this conversation he disapproved of the me- 
thod of preaching in New England at the time he was a 
youth, in reference to the doctrines of election and the na- 
ture of the sinner's depravity. Upon the subject of original 
sin, he appeared to agree with Dr. Taylor. He also made 
remarks in defence of Dr. Taylor's views, which were an- 
swered by Dr. Woods. On the subject of the ability of the 
sinner, he argued as New School theologians do. He said 
that he should not like to answer the question whether a Uni- 
tarian would be saved or not. My idea and impression from 
the conversation was, that Mr. Clapp ought not to be a mi- 
nister in the Presbyterian church ; but that he still kept near- 



287 



er the standards than several ministers in the Presbyterian 
church. 

Ques. 2. Does witness remember any of the remarks which 
he made to me in private conversation concerning the ser- 
mons which I delivered in Port Gibson ? 

Ans. I recollect, after his last sermon, of expressing from 
the pulpit high approbation of it. There was a sermon 
preached one sabbath in my absence, which made the impres- 
sion on several minds that Mr. Clapp assailed the doctrine of 
Predestination, in reference to which he afterwards made 
explanations from the pulpit, which were satisfactory. I re- 
collect, in making his explanations, he remarked that he would 
state in substance the opinions of that sermon. These ex- 
planations occurred on Wednesday night. The Presbytery 
met that day ; I believe the members were generally present. 

Resolved, that we have a recess for half an hour. After 
recess, resumed business and continued the examination of 
Mr. Butler. 

Ques. 3. Does witness remember that the accused stated 
on that occasion that he had learned from the pastor of the 
the Presbyterian church in Port Gibson that the views which 
accused had presented in the sermon on the preceeding sab- 
bath on the doctrine of election, had given dissatisfaction to 
some members of that church ; and that he would take that 
opportunity to repeat them, because the members of the Mis- 
sissippi Presbytery were present and could judge of their 
correctness ? 

Jins. I only recollect the fact alluded to in the first part of 
this question : I do not recollect the fact alluded to in the lat- 
ter part of the question. 

Ques. 4. Will witness please to state whether he believes 
the views on election, which he heard me advance in his 
pulpit, were essentially in accordance with the standards of 
the Presbyterian church ? 

Ans. I think they were. 

Ques. 5. Will witness state whether he does not remember 



288 



of observing at Port Gibson to the accused, that in the judg- 
ment of witnesses the theological views of the accused had 
been misunderstood by the Presbytery generally ? 

Jlns. I do not ; I recollect of expressing such as my own 
views, but not of making such remark in regard to the Pres- 
bytery. I stated that I had been under an erroneous impres- 
sion in regard to his sentiments on the divinity of Christ and 
the doctrine of the final salvation of all men. 

Ques. 6. Will witness state whether, if he had heard from 
the accused at Port Gibson any essentially erroneous opi- 
nions on theology, he would not have felt it his duty to have 
communicated the same to his co-Presbyters ? 

Jlns. I should. I however heard him, in conversing at the 
tea-table, make use of the expression, that " God converted 
as many souls as he could," which I thought not consistent as 
a Presbyterian minister. The lady of the house immediate- 
ly replied, " Are not all things possible with God ?" Mr. Clapp 
in answer said, " a benevolent Father would give a son every 
" virtuous disposition he possibly could. God was our infinitely 
" benevolent Father, and of course would endow his children 
" with every virtuous disposition he could." He stated that 
God could not, with justice to the free agency of man, and in 
consistence with the nature of his moral government, do any 
more for the conversion of sinners than he does. My reply 
to Mr. Clapp was, that he was binding himself to a limitation 
in the number saved in one way, and I in another way. That 
I believed God had devised a plan in infinite mercy, whereby 
a definite number would be saved ; but that he limited the 
number of the finally saved, by the nature of the moral 
agent and the divine government. 

Ques. 7. Does witness remember of being present in a 
meeting of the Presbytery at Port Gibson, when an attempt 
was made by the friends of the accused to procure the adop- 
tion of the report of the chairman of the Committee of con- 
ference ? 

Arts. I recollect that on Monday morning the Rev. Alexan- 
der Newton, in consideration of the answers given by Mr. 
Clapp to the questions proposed by the Committee of confer- 



289 



once, and the letter explanatory of his letter written to the Pres- 
bytery at Pisgah requesting a dismission, offered a resolution 
to suspend any farther prosecution of Mr. Clapp's case, and 
that many of the members were in favour of the resolution. 
This resolution was not passed, though I believed, and ex- 
pressed the belief, that a majority of the Presbytery would 
have been in favour of the resolution could it have been con- 
sistently put, although those voting in its favour would not 
have been fully satisfied that they had then obtained a clear 
view of Mr. Clapp's sentiments. It was remarked, that if 
Satan himself had given as orthodox, a creed, it would have 
been accepted. These individuals proceeded upon the 
ground that Mr. Clapp was upon examination for his theolo- 
gical opinions and not his moral character. I recollect that 
one of the members of the Presbytery objected to the reso- 
lution, on the ground of doubts existing of the sincerity of the 
accused. The friends of the resolution maintained that the 
Presbytery should decide simply on the exhibition of his sen- 
timents as contained in the explanatory letter and his an- 
swers to the questions proposed by the Committee of confer- 
ence. 

Ques* 8. Does witness remember of stating to the accused 
at Port Gibson, that, in the opinion of witness, the accused 
might lawfully continue to be a member of the Presbyterian 
church, inasmuch as the opinions of the accused were essen- 
tially coincident with those of the New School ? 

Jlns. I do not recollect of expressing that opinion to the 
accused, though I thought, at the conclusion of the sessions of 
the Presbytery, that if Mr. Clapp adhered to the sentiments 
expressed in his explanatory letter and answers, there would 
be no ground for a suspension on account of his theological 
opinions. 

Ques. 9. Does witness remember having said to the accus- 
ed at Port Gibson, that the decision of the General Assem- 
bly in 1831, in declaring that the accused ought to be regard- 
ed as a member of the Mississippi Presbytery, and amenable 
to that body for all errors in doctrine or deportment, had en- 
tirely frustrated the plans of the Presbytery with respect to 



290 



the first Presbyterian church in New Orleans : or that the 
Presbytery had been dished by the General Assembly ? 

Ans. I do not ; I always disapproved of that decision of the 
General Assembly, and thought it would have been 'greatly to 
the interest of the accused and the church had he not forced 
the Assembly to that decision. 

Ques. 10. Does witness remember that at the close of the 
sessions of the Presbytery at Port Gibson the Rev. George 
Potts arose, and moved that thanks be returned to the great 
Head of the church for the entire peace and harmony that 
had prevailed among the members during said session ? 

Ans. I do not. 

Ques, 11. Will witness state whether he remembers of hav- 
ing expressed the opinion, that the letter of the accused to 
the Presbytery of March 5th, 1830, was contradictory to the 
one addressed by the accused to the Presbytery, Oct. 14th, 
1831? 

Jlns. I do not. 

CROSS EXAMINED BY THE COMMITTEE OF PROSECUTION. 

Ques. 12. Was witness present when the Committee of 
conference with the accused attempted to make their first re- 
port to the Presbytery ? 

Ans. I do not recollect. 

Ques. 13. Was witness present when the Committee of 
conference with the accused made their final report to the 
Presbytery ? 

Ans. I think I was. 

Ques. 14. Did the accused or the Committee of conference, 
on the final report, make any other explanations to the Pres- 
bytery than the written report and the accompanying interro- 
gatories ? 

Ans. I heard none. 

Here the accused conceded that he was present when the 
Committee of conference with him made their final report 



291 



to the Presbytery with the questions and answers, and made 
no explanations therewith at that time. 

Ques. 15. Did not witness, or some other member of the 
Presbytery, on the rejection of Mr. Newton's motion, obtain, 
or move to obtain, a reconsideration of the last motion ; and 
was not such reconsideration obtained to satisfy the dissatisfied 
members ? 

Ans. A reconsideration was obtained, which satisfied the 
supporters of Mr. Newton's resolution. 

Ques. 16. Can witness say whether he did or did not state to 
the Rev. J. B. Warren, after the meeting of the Presbytery 
at Port Gibson, that the change of the Committee of prose- 
cution into a Committee of investigation, in the case of the 
accused, was made by the Presbytery merely to smooth over 
matters ? 

Ans. I do not recollect ; and if I were to speak from the 
impression then made, I should say I never did. I remarked, 
probably to Mr. Warren, to this effect : — that it was doubtful 
whether the prosecution of the accused would be continued 
on the ground of his theological opinions ; I thought it would 
be taken up on the ground of moral character. 

Ques. 17. by the Rev. George Potts. Does witness recol- 
lect that it was given, as a reason in support of Mr. Newton's 
resolution, that the resolution was intended simply to express 
this fact, — that there was nothing in the answers of Mr. Clapp 
to the questions which would be objected to on the score of 
sound doctrine ? 

Ans. The nature of that resolution witness does not dis- 
tinctly recollect, though he thinks the resolution was to move 
an indefinite postponement of any further investigation. 

Ques. 18. by the Rev. Mr. Potts. Does witness recollect 
that Mr. Newton, the mover of that resolution, made this re- 
mark, — that it would not be improper for the Presbytery to say 
that there was nothing in the sentiments of Mr. Clapp, as 
exhibited in the report of the Committee of conference, which 
rendered it inconsistent for him to retain a place in the Pres- 
byterian church ? 

39 



292 



Ans. I recollect remarks being made to that effect during 
the discussion. 

Ques. 19. by the Rev. B. Chase. Does witness recollect 
that both members of the Committee advocated the adoption 
of the report in Mr. Clapp's presence, on the ground that the 
Presbytery had a definite expression of his (Mr. C's) theolo- 
gical views then before them in his answers given to the ques- 
tions without any explanations ? 

Ans. I do not recollect. On account of my pastoral engage- 
ment, I had permission to be absent frequently from the sessions 
of the Presbytery, and therefore did not take that part in those 
transactions which would enable me to recollect the arguments 
and remarks in favour of the adoption of the report of the 
Committee of conference. My recollection of the remarks 
were chiefly of those in favour of Mr. Newton's resolution 
on the last day. 

Ques. 20. by the Rev. B. Chase. Did witness understand 
from the Committee or otherwise, that Mr. Clapp had given 
any explanations which tended to gratify the sense in which 
he answered the questions ? 

Ans. I did not. 

Ques. 21. by the accused, by permission. Did not witness, 
when supporting the resolution by Mr. Newton, consider the 
letter of explanation addressed to the Presbytery by the ac- 
cused, dated October 14, 1831, to be before the Presbytery, 
in the same sense as his answers to the final interrogatories 
propounded by the Committee of conference were before the 
Presbytery ? 

Ans. I did. 

Ques. 22. by the moderator. Have you any further testi- 
mony to offer, either for or against the accused ? 
Ans. I do not recollect any thing farther. 

The above testimony was read to witness in presence of the 
parties, and approved, and the witness discharged. 

Adjourned to meet at half past 6 o'clock. Concluded with 
prayer. 



293 



At half past 6, P. M. met according to adjournment. 
Opened with prayer. 

The Rev. George Potts was introduced by the accused, and 
being duly sworn, testified as follows, viz : 

Ques. 1. Will witness state whether he recollects of de- 
claring to the accused by letter, during the latter part of the 
winter or spring of 1830, that it was the opinion of the wit- 
ness and his ministerial brethren that duty required the peace- 
able withdrawal of the accused from the Mississippi Presby- 
tery? 

Arts. I recollect passing some such opinion about that 
time. 

Ques. 2. Can witness say that his opinion was the result of 
a long and confidential intercourse with the accused concern- 
ing the theological sentiments of the accused ? 

Ans. It was not the result of a long and confidential inter- 
course. Witness had been for a long time in confidential in- 
tercourse with the accused^f>rincipally by letter ; but the 
opinion to which the accused alludes, was based upon facts 
which occurred not long before the opinion was expressed. 
Witness wishes to add, however, that this representation is 
not to imply that there had always been a full agreement be- 
tween witness and the accused upon many minor points. 
Witness believes, so far as he can recollect, that the first 
strong impressions of the unsoundness of the accused as a 
Presbyterian minister, were conveyed by parts of his corres- 
pondence during the years 1829 and 1830, and by certain ru- 
mours which came to his ears (as he believed) from authentic 
sources. 

Ques. 3. Will witness state whether he sent to the Presby- 
tery that met at Pisgah church in April 1830, any letters ad- 
dressed by the accused to witness prior to the date of that 
meeting ? 

Ans. Witness has already informed the accused that indis- 
position prevented his attendance at that meeting, and that he 
accordingly put into the possession of one of his brethren the 
letter of withdrawal which the accused had sent endorsed to 



294 



him; that being unable to see his brethren personally, he 
felt himself called upon imperiously, by a regard for the inte- 
rest of the church, (which he hopes will always be of para- 
mount importance in his eyes,) to transmit, for the information 
of his brethren, the letter in which Mr. Clapp's letter of with- 
drawal was enclosed, and, as he believes, the letter which 
preceded it ; as in this way correct information of Mr. Clapp's 
feelings might be made known privately among the brethren. 

He begs permission to add, that so far as he now recollects, 
he has already, upon a previous occasion, avowed to the ac- 
cused and others his belief that confidential intercourse be- 
tween individuals was to be limited by circumstances ; that 
duty to the church of which they were both ministers was 
imperative, and forbade the concealment of the knowledge of 
any fact which threatened injury to its interests. Upon this 
principle he has acted and intends to act. The obligations of 
private friendship, when they run counter to the obligations of 
the minister of Christ, must give way. 

Ques. 4. Will witness state why he selected two letters only, 
and did not send the whole of the private correspondence to 
the members of the Presbytery ? 

Ans. Witness would repeat that these letters were sent for 
the private satisfaction of the brethren of the Presbytery, and 
not to be formally laid before them in session at the Presby- 
tery ; and the reason why he selected those two letters was 
this, — he believed that the previous correspondence of the 
accused, up to about the year 1820, would not furnish a fair 
exhibition of the state of Mr. Clapp's views and feelings at the 
time of his request to be dismissed. 

Here the accused called upon witness for two letters ad- 
dressed by the accused to witness, bearing date February 5th, 
1830, and March 5th, 1830, which were produced and placed 
in the hands of the moderator ; and, at the request of the ac- 
cused, are here inserted entire as follows, viz : 

" New Orleans, February hth, 1830. 
" Dear Brother. — Your short letter came to hand some 



295 



weeks ago. Have you read the attack on the American Educa- 
tion Society in the Biblical Repertory published in Princeton ; 
the attack, I mean, written (so report says) by Dr. Carnahan ? 
It is an unchristian, narrow production, evidently originating 
in the apprehension lest Yankee Town manufacture minis- 
ters more rapidly than the General Assembly. The objection 
to the American Education Society, — that it may acquire a 
vast capital, liable hereafter to be perverted to the advance- 
ment of heresy and sin, — is substantially the same which Fanny 
Wright urges against the church of Christ and all subordinate 
institutions. I have no sectarian prejudices. I care not 
which denomination grows fastest, provided such are added 
as shall be saved. The church of Christ is one ; one spirit, 
one Lord, one hope, one faith, one baptism. Is Christ divid- 
ed ? In whose name were we baptized ; that of Calvin, 
Wesley, or Christ ? I wish the reign of bigotry was over ; it 
and ignorance are destined to expire simultaneously, and to 
moulder in the same tomb. You say report is, that I preach 
against our standard. If by " our standard" you mean the 
Bible, I flatly contradict it ; but if by standard you mean 
the Confession of Faith, I frankly avow that I shall fearlessly 
preach the Bible, whether it be accordant or unaccordant 
with the Confession. I never received the Confession as an 
unerring criterion of truth, but only as an human, imperfect 
summary of Scriptural doctrines. You don't preach the Con- 
fession yourself. If you were to preach unconditional election 
and reprobation, literal imputation of Adam's sin, physical 
inability, irresistible grace, the entire passivity of the sinner 
in conversion, the impossibility of falling from grace, in a 
plain-spoken and direct manner ; would the wise and good 
meet to hear you preach ? I trow not ; public sentiment 
compels you to keep them out of sight. It is a painful thought 
that my brethren are in such deep solicitude about my senti- 
ments. But what can I do ? I adopt Stewart's motto, — trust 
in God and do your duty. Biblical truth I shall adhere to ; 
that is, what I think to be Biblical truth. I cannot permit 
others to think and judge for me. Of one thing you may rest 



296 



assured ; I shall at all times declare my sentiments without re- 
serve. 

" If my ministerial brethren at any time shall come to the 
conclusion that my departure from the standard is so great as 
to be inconsistent with longer adhesion to the sect, I will 
withdraw. The cause of religion in these states requires that 
differences should be amicably settled. 

" Please inform me what was done last meeting of the Pres- 
bytery. Where does next Presbytery meet ? Brother Hazard 
wishes to be ordained next Presbytery. He is wanted at the 
Port and elsewhere, to preach and administer ordinances. Be 
so good as to let us know whether, in your opinion, there will 
be any obstacle in the way. Brother Hazard is, in your sense 
of the word, orthodox. He cannot read a word of Hebrew ; 
and so long as he remains ignorant of this language, he is not 
capable of being corrupted by German exegetical authors. 
In this point it may be true that " ignorance is bliss at any 
rate, it is a panoply against what many deem heretical. Ha- 
zard, I have reason to believe, is a zealous, sincere, worthy 
man ; ordination would enable him to be more useful. Will 
you be particular in answering this part of my letter, and as 
soon as you can conveniently. 

4t We have an overflowing house. All the pews are rent- 
ed, and daily applicants for pews are turned away. The ful- 
ness of the house may be a good or a bad sign. It may be 
that my preaching is more and more accommodated to a car- 
nal worldly taste ; of this I am not conscious. Poor human 
nature is frail and fallible ; without divine assistance all our 
efforts will be worse than in vain. I hope I realize this truth. 
Family all well. Compliments to Mrs. Potts. 

" With affection, yours, 

«T. CLAPP." 

" New Orleans, March 5th, 1830. 
" Dear Brother. — I received yours of the 26th ultimo, the 
day before yesterday. I am glad you express your mind so 
freely, and shall take the same liberty myself, and with feel- 
ings of friendship to you unabated. You say my departure 



297 



from the doctrines of the Presbyterian church gives you pain. 
This circumstance to me is inexplicable on the supposition of 
your sincerity ; for you believe that God has foreordained what- 
soever comes to pass, so that nothing could happen otherwise 
than it does, and whatsoever happens is agreeable to GodPs 
purpose and essential to God's glory. Hence my wanderings 
from Presbyterianism should be contemplated by you with 
feelings only of joy and thanksgiving. Surely we should ex- 
ult in every thing that takes place, if it must be so and God 
cannot be glorified without it. 

" You feel grieved that with my sentiments I should have 
retained a connexion with the Presbyterian church so long. 
Hundreds of my sentiments are now members of the Presby- 
terian church in different parts of the United States. In my 
humble opinion, all that a man can mean when he subscribes 
to the Confession of Faith (unless he be dishonest and bigoted) 
is, that it contains the essential fundamental tenets of Chris- 
tianity. No other subscription is compatible with a pure en- 
lightened state of mind, nor with the course which must be 
adopted by all who, disdaining to be bound down to articles 
drawn by uninspired man, are firmly resolved to walk accord- 
ing to the charter of divine truth, and to maintain the freedom 
wherewith Christ has made them free. I joined the Presby- 
terian church, not from selfish sectarian views ; but simply be- 
cause I thought that all those in these parts, who truly love the 
Lord Jesus Christ, should truly also love one another ; be one 
in spirit, prayer, hope, and efforts. Sorry am I that pride, 
ambition, vain glory, earthly mindedness, envy, wranglings, 
and sectarianism, should separate the hearts, deform the beau- 
ty, and lessen the usefulness of those engaged in the glorious 
cause of promoting truth and holiness. In continuing my 
connexion with the church so long, I have acted from a con- 
science ' void of offence both towards God and man/ I have 
done what merits not censure, but praise. My views of creeds 
1 believe to be correct ; I believe they will be universally dis- 
carded by professing Christians before the year 1850. On 
the night of superstition, bigotry, and ignorance, the day be- 
gins to dawn. You say it will not do for each man singly to 



298 



pronounce what is, or is not, essential departure from the Bi- 
ble. I affirm directly the contrary ; I say each man must 
decide for himself. If he fail to do it, he is a coward, a sin- 
ner, and a slave. I hesitate not to say, that in proportion as 
one is pure and holy, he will reverence and assert intellectual 
and moral independence ; he will reverence and assert entire 
freedom of thought and expression on the subject of religion. 
Yes, he will do it, though he live in the midst of a timid, cow- 
ardly, servile, abject, temporizing, sycophantic multitude. 
Yes, he will do it, though the world stand arrayed against him ; 
and this, not from obstinancy or desire to be singular, but 
from the calm though invincible love of truth ; from the per- 
ception of her surpassing worth ; the consciousness of her 
beauty and heavenly descent ; from the conviction, too, that 
she is destined to a final and glorious triumph. Whoever de- 
serves the name of freeman, christian, patriot, philanthrophist, 
will adhere to what seems to him to be truth ; yea, though it 
turn against him father, mother, relative, and friend ; though 
it deprive him of property and reputation ; though it banish 
him from society to the caverns of the mountains or the her- 
mit's cell. Better to live in a cave or dungeon, than to be an 
intellectual moral slave. For in a dungeon a free mind might 
hold communion with the great and good ; might send abroad 
its excursions at will over all that's bright in Jehovah, his son, 
and their works. In the lonely musings and fervent devotion 
of absolute solitude, one may enjoy God, feel his presence, 
and be in heaven. 

" You cannot point out a community, in the bounds of Chris- 
tendom, of which the great mass are not made (like worthless 
machines) to move as the judgments and consciences of others 
direct ; and if one spirit, more restless and inquisitive than the 
majority, presume to question prevalent opinions or practices, 
he is immediately checked ; if yet he persevere, he is menaced 
by authority or bribed by promises ; if he go on, the whole 
weight of that community called elect, is made to press upon 
him as they used to press witches to death in old times. Yes, 
he who is faithful to God, truth, and conscience, must stem 
that inexplicable but mighty power lodged in the frown, 



293 

sneers, sarcasm, coldness, neglect, gall, bitterness, wormwood* 
public obloquy, and secret slander of those on whose broad 
pbylactories, and on whose foreheads, are labelled 4 followers 
of the meek and lowly Jesus.' What a misnomer ! Follow- 
ers of bigotry, ignorance, human authority rather than God's. 
You say the reign of bigotry is not over ; I know it full well* 
To accomplish this result, we want a host of living instructors 
that know something about the Bible ; who have drunk deep 
into its genius and spirit ; who are in love with its simple and 
glorious realities, (so much so as to nauseate creeds ;) who 
will go forward courageously, unseduced, unterrified ; who 
cannot be diverted, scared, or browbeaten by the selfish, nar- 
row, and corrupt. Yes ; we want a host of such to march 
through the land, North, South, East, and West, before man* 
kind will be emancipated from the galling fetters of ignorance, 
superstition, and church despotism. It is melancholy to re- 
flect how many millions there are in Christendom, who not 
only do not think, whose intellects are totally undisciplined, 
the slaves of prejudice ; but they dare not think, they dare not 
inquire, they are afraid to assert their intellectual and spiritual 
rights. 

" Dear brother, widely as our views may differ on some 
points in this zcorld, let our hearts be united ; let us strive to 
be more prayerful, zealous, and devoted disciples of the Sa- 
viour. I perceive by your last that many misrepresentations 
as to my views reach you. This would be the case even if 
you lived in this city ; some cannot report faithfully, others 
are not disposed to do it. Be pleased to take the enclosed to 
the Presbytery. It is best I should stand on my own bottom ; 
dismiss, and all will be well. If the enclosed be drawn in 
such a way that there is any difficulty from the form of go- 
vernment in the way of granting my request, be pleased to 
let me know it in season. 

" Affectionately yours, 

« THEODORE CLAPP." 

" P. S. We have a fine daughter, about a month old. Our 
boy is about eighteen months old. Boy first, then a girl ; 

40 



300 



this is orthodox. Mrs. Clapp is well, and desires with me 
respects to Mrs. Potts." 

Ques. 5. Did not witness consider, at the time he commu- 
nicated those letters to the members of the Presbytery pri- 
vately, that the information which he supposed they contain- 
ed as to changes in my theological views would be regarded 
by the Presbytery as authentic information concerning said 
changes, and necessarily affect the ultimate decision of the 
Presbytery with respect to my letter asking dismission from 
this body ? 

Ans. Witness never supposed that they would furnish 
ground for the action of the Presbytery in his case. Unless 
they had been formally sent to the moderator, and publicly 
read before the members, they could not possibly be acted 
upon. All that was essentially necessary for the considera- 
tion of the Presbytery, was Mr. Clapp's own letter formally 
communicated by himself to the moderator, and requesting 
the action of the Presbytery in a given way, and upon grounds 
he himself presented. Upon this letter alone the Presbytery 
acted, as their records will show. The other letters referred 
to were in no wise necessary to the procurement of their ul- 
timate decision ; they did not contain any thing new in re- 
gard to theological views, as the question implies, but simply 
exhibited the state of the feelings of the accused. Witness 
adds here, in justice to himself, that at this period of the cor- 
respondence his own communications with the accused were, 
as he thought and intended, calculated to repel strictly confi- 
dential intercourse. The familiarities in the above letters 
were not encouraged by any thing in the tone or diction of 
the letters of witness at this time. 

Ques. 6. Does witness recollect of conversing with the ac- 
cused in Natchez, a short time before the meeting of the Pres- 
bytery at Port Gibson in October, 1831, concerning the let- 
ters of the accused to witness, in which the accused mention- 
ed the names of some professing Christians in New Orleans 
as belonging to an opposition which originated in iniquity ? 

Ans. Witness remembers that conversation. I recollect 



301 



that the accused did then, as he has always done, disclaim that 
connection of his words which witness has reason to believe 
would appear to most persons the most natural ; at the same 
time he is bound to say, that, according to his best recollection, 
observations were then made by the accused which implied 
that the accused would consider himself justified, even if the 
most natural construction of his words had been the one he 
intended. 

Ques. 7. Will witness state whether he heard the accused 
deliver a sermon in Mr. Butler's church in Port Gibson, on 
the evening of the first day of the meeting there in October, 
1831 ; and whether witness heard the accused, after deliver- 
ing said sermon, give his views on election ? 

Ans. I heard a few words of the close of that sermon, which, 
so far as they went, were, to the best of my recollection, un- 
exceptionable ; but I considered them as having been by no 
means a full and fair view of the subject of election, nor did 
I suppose he intended them as such. 

Ques. 8. Does witness recollect of having a conversation 
with the accused at the house of Mr. Carpenter in Port Gib- 
son on the subject of election ? 

Ans. He does ; that and various other subjects were the 
topics of conversation till a late hour. So far as the subject 
of election was concerned, the views expressed by the ac- 
cused were satisfactory ; for witness thought them Arminian. 

Ques. 9. Does not witness recollect that on the above-men- 
tioned occasion the accused denied that it is a doctrine of the 
Arminians, that God's purpose to save the elect was founded 
on the foresight of their faith and repentance ? 

Ans. The accused did deny that the purpose of God in 
election was founded upon the foresight of faith and repent- 
ance, and maintained that in that denial he accorded with the 
doctrine of Arminius. But other observations were made at 
that time by the accused, which, in the opinion of witness, 
brought the view of the accused as to election exactly upon 
what are generally understood to be Arminian ground ; in 
other words, what he seemed to give with one hand witness 
thought he took back with the other, 



302 



Resolved to adjourn^ and meet to-morrow morning at 8 
o'clock in the school-house. Concluded with prayer. 

BENJAMIN CHASE, Clerk. 

Saturday, 8 o'clock, A. 3VL 
The Presbytery met according to adjournment. Opened 
with prayer. 

Resumed the examination of the Rev. George Potts. 

Ques. 10. Will witness state what he remembers of the first 
and second reports of the Committee of conference made at 
Port Gibson ? 

Jlns. The recollection of witness upon that point is, he 
thinks, distinct ; viz. a Committee, consisting of the Rev. 
Messrs. Donan, Newton, and Moore, was appointed to confer 
with Mr. Clapp farther upon the subject of his views. A let- 
ter from the accused, which had been just read, was also put 
into their hands. Witness believes that he himself moved the 
appointment of that Committee, and his reasons for so do- 
ing were these : he was not satisfied with the views of the 
aforesaid letter, and thought there were points altogether 
omitted in that letter upon which he desired to have a formal 
declaration of the belief of the accused. Some of these points 
he suggested to the notice of the Committee ; and he con- 
fesses that he did so with the full expectation that the views 
of the accused would finally prove unsatisfactory to the Pres- 
bytery. The Committee, after conferring with Mr. Clapp, pro- 
fessed themselves ready to report, and were proceeding to do 
so, but in so irregular a manner, that they were very soon in- 
terrupted by the witness and others, upon the ground that the 
Committee were presenting a report partly verbal, and that 
the written parts of it appeared to be in pencil. These objec- 
tions induced the Committee to request leave to withdraw, 
and prepare their report in such form as would be satisfactory 
to the Presbytery. They withdrew accordingly : and soon 
after presented a report, a precise copy of which is to be 
found in the printed minutes of the Presbytery. This report 
was accepted^ i. e. (according to the technical language of our 



303 



church courts,) taken out of the hands of the Committee, and 
then open to the action of the Presbytery. This report was 
not adopted, but placed in the hands of a Committee of inves- 
tigation afterwards appointed. Witness does not recollect 
what portion of the written parts of the conference of the 
Committee with Mr. Clapp, a report of which was first of- 
fered but objected to, were read. 

Ques. 11. Did not witness consider the letter of explana- 
tions addressed by the accused to the Presbytery at Port 
Gibson, October 14th, 1831, to be as regularly before the 
Presbytery and the Committee of conference as the ques- 
tions propounded to the accused with the answers 1 

Ans. The Committee of conference was appointed to con- 
fer with Mr. Clapp upon the subject of his letter just before 
read to the Presbytery. The object of the appointment was 
to obtain more full and explicit views both upon the points 
mentioned in that letter and other points omitted in it. The 
aforesaid letter belonged to the Presbytery of course, and 
was subject to their ultimate disposal at any time. 

Ques. 12. Does witness recollect of seeing or hearing the 
first set of interrogatories propounded to the accused by the 
Committee of conference, and offered to the Presbytery in 
their first attempt to report ? 

Ans. Witness believes that he had an imperfect glance of 
the paper containing those questions, but is sure he did not 
at any time, then or since, obtain a clear idea of the nature of 
the questions or replies. Witness saw the paper in the hands 
of the chairman of the Committee of conference just after 
the Committee had withdrawn and were about to retire for 
their second conference with the accused. He then recog- 
nized Mr. Clapp's hand-writing, and saw it was in pencil 
marks and without signature of his name. 

Ques. 13. Does witness remember whether the chairman of 
the Committee of conference was arrested in the reading of 
his first report by an order of the Presbytery ? 

Ans. No formal order of the Presbytery was passed. The 
Committee requested leave to retire, and shape their report 



304 



in such a way as would meet the objections of members who 
had interrupted them, and leave was tacitly granted. 

Ques. 14. Will witness state why the chairman of the 
Committee of conference requested permission to retire for 
a second conference with the accused ? 

Ans. The Committee had heard the objections made to the 
form in which they were presenting their report, and I sup- 
pose felt the justice of them ; witness has already stated the 
nature of the objections made. 

Ques. 15. Will witness state whether he and others acted 
in accordance with the rules of business adopted by this Pres- 
bytery in arresting the first attempt to report made by the 
Committee of conference ? 

Ans. There are no rules, either written or otherwise, which 
forbade any members of the Presbytery to interrupt an ir- 
regular proceeding. If the Committee had insisted that their 
mode of reporting was regular, it would have been necessary 
to arrest them formally ; but they at once admitted the jus- 
tice of the objections, and had tacit leave to withdraw. This 
is a common practice in our church courts, and one to which 
the accused at the time made no objections. It was his right 
to object if he had seen proper. 

Ques. 16. Will witness please state whether the paper in 
possession of Mr. Chase, and the contents of which he has 
given in his testimony, is, according to the best of his recol- 
lection, the original paper of interrogatories and answers there 
given by the accused which witness saw in the hands of the 
chairman of the Committee of conference after he attempt- 
ed to make his first report ? 

Ans. His recollection of the appearance and contents of 
that paper is so indistinct, that he can only say that this may 
be, and probably is, the paper. 

Here the accused stated his belief that the paper referred 
to in the above question, and at that time exhibited to witness, 
contained the original interrogatories and answers thereto 
offered to the Presbytery when the Committee of conference 
first attempted to report. 



305 



Ques. 17. Does witness remember of hearing some mem* 
bers of the Presbytery object to the answers of the accused to 
the first set of interrogatories propounded by the Committee 
of conference to the accused, on the ground that the language 
of said answers was too indeterminate or unintelligible ? 

Jlns. I do not remember. 

Ques. 18. Will witness state whether the answers in the 
above paper appeared to him to be couched in language inde- 
terminate or unintelligible ? 

Ans. Witness has already stated that he does not distinctly 
recollect that he obtained at that time a fair view of the con- 
tents of the paper. His objections to the form in which the 
Committee presented their report were not founded upon an 
accurate knowledge of the paper ; he knew nothing then, as 
to the clearness or ambiguity of Mr. Clapp's replies to the 
Committee. This is the best of his recollection. 

Resolved, that we have a recess until after divine worship. 

After recess, resumed business. Horatio N. Spencer, Esq. 
being present as a witness on the part of the accused, and 
desirous to obtain his discharge as soon as practicable, the 
further testimony of Mr. Potts was postponed for the intro- 
duction of Mr. Spencer, who being duly sworn, testified as 
follows : viz. 

Ques. 1. by the accused. Does witness recollect having 
conversed with the accused, in October 1831, concerning the 
theological views of the accused ? 

Ans. I have no distinct recollection of conversing with the 
accused concerning his theological views, but I had a conver- 
sation with him at that time concerning the differences be- 
tween him and the Mississippi Presbytery ; but do not recol- 
lect particulars. 

Ques. 2. Does witness recollect of remarking to the accus- 
ed, that, so far as witness could judge from conversations 
with members of the Presbytery, a majority of that body was 
in favour of an immediate and final settlement of the difficul- 
ties with the accused ? 



306 



Jns. 1 do not recollect any such remark. I do not think I 
spoke to more than two or three members of the Presbytery 
on the subject. 

Ques. 3. Was witness present during the sessions of the 
Presbytery at Port Gibson, when the chairman of the Com- 
mittee of conference made his first or second report ; or 
when Mr. Newton offered his resolution to suspend further 
proceedings in my case ? 

Ans. I was present when the reports were read or offered 
to be read. I cannot say whether I was present or not when 
Mr. Newton offered the resolution ; I recollect being there 
during the discussion on that resolution. 

Ques. 4. Does witness remember hearing the accused preach 
at Port Gibson ; how often, and where ? 

Ans. In the Methodist church once or twice, and in the 
Presbyterian church I cannot say how often, once or twice. 
I do not recollect distinctly with regard to expressions in the 
Methodist church. I thought his manner of explaining the 
doctrine of election was at least exceptionable, and liable to 
convey wrong impressions. The subject was incidentally in- 
troduced into the sermon ; and although I saw nothing but 
what was consistent with my views on that subject, yet I felt 
extremely uneasy under it, because I felt that there was much 
that was calculated to make directly an opposite impression 
on others. I found afterwards that such impressions were 
actually made. 

The accused announced that he was done with the witness, 
and the Committee of prosecution declined asking any ques- 
tions. Previously to the final question being put by the mo- 
derator, the accused requested permission to propose another 
question to the witness, which was granted, and is as follows : 
viz. 

Ques. 5. by the accused, by permission. Will witness state 
what kind of unfavourable impressions, remarks made by 
the accused in the Methodist church were calculated to 
make ? 



307 



Ans. That he was unfavourable to election as held by tire 
Presbyterian church. 

Ques. 6. by the moderator. Have you any further testimony 
to offer, either for or against the accused, in relation to these 
charges ? 

Ans, Nothing that I recollect. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in presence 
of the parties, and approved, and the witness discharged. 

On motion, resolved that we pass from a judicial capacity 
to the transaction of ordinary business. 

The Committee appointed to draft a minute in relation to 
rumours respecting the manner in which Mr. Clapp has sub- 
mitted to his sentence of suspension from the Gospel ministry, 
submitted the following, which was accepted and adopted, and 
is as follows : viz. 

" Whereas a rumour has reached this Presbytery that Mr. 
Clapp, since his suspension, has continued to officiate as stated 
supply with the first Presbyterian church in New Orleans ; 
and whereas such conduct is considered contumacious and 
censurable were it proved by constitutional testimony, yet 
inasmuch as no such proof seems within their reach, and inas- 
much, also, as Mr. Clapp denies all such contumacy as is im- 
plied herein ; therefore 

" Resolved, that the Presbytery dismiss the subject with the 
distinct declaration, that to officiate as a leader of public re- 
ligious exercises is altogether inconsistent with a state of sus- 
pension from the ministry." 

Adjourned to meet at half-past 8 o'clock on Monday morn- 
ing. Concluded with prayer. 

BENJ. CHASE, Clerk. 

Pine Ridge, Monday, December 17, 1832. 
The Presbytery met according to adjournment ; opened 
with prayer. Understanding the house would soon be occu- 

41 



308 



pied by the school, resolved to adjourn and meet immediately 
in the church. Concluded with prayer. 

Met according to adjournment ; opened with prayer. The 
moderator announced from the chair that the Presbytery was 
about to pass to a judicial capacity, and solemnly enjoined 
upon the members to regard their high character as judges of 
a court of Jesus Christ. 

The Presbytery being informed that the school-house would 
not be occupied during their sessions, resolved to adjourn 
and meet immediately in that house. Concluded with prayer. 

Met according to adjournment ; opened with prayer. Re- 
sumed the testimony of Mr. Potts : 

Ques. 19. Will witness state in what points my letter of 
October 14th, 1831, explanatory of my former letter of March 
5th, 1830, both addressed to the Presbytery, appeared to wit- 
ness to be unsatisfactory ? 

Ans. Witness has already stated, in reply to a former ques- 
tion, that the reason why he moved the appointment of a 
Committee of conference, was, that he, as an individual mem- 
ber of the Presbytery, was not satisfied with the views of the 
aforesaid letter. Although he cannot see that his individual 
opinion on this point has any bearing upon the matter at issue, 
he is ready to say that his dissatisfaction with the letter was 
principally founded upon the fact that it did not include the 
views of the accused upon several points upon which witness 
conceived it important that the accused should be questioned. 
So far as his own opinion of the aforesaid letter is concerned, 
he does not believe that there is any thing in it which is essen- 
tially inconsistent with the doctrines of the Confession of 
Faith. He could see, however, that parts of it might bear an 
interpretation which would be (in his opinion) inconsistent 
with that Confession. The letter, for instance, says nothing 
of the nature of the atonement, but touches only upon its ex- 
tent. Calvin and Turretin are declared to be in opposition 
as to the doctrine of imputation. An assertion is made in it 
which the witness believed to be incorrect, as to the views of 
several Presbyterian clergymen in regard to the doctrine of 



309 



final perseverance ; other things might be specified. The 
omissions in the letter were, nevertheless, the chief ground of 
dissatisfaction ; and hence the appointment of a Committee of 
conference, through whom witness hoped that explicit views 
upon all the important points in doubt might be presented to 
the Presbytery. The interrogatories reported by that Com- 
mittee did present such explicit views. These questions, and 
answers given to them by the accused, needed no explanation, 
and none was offered by the accused. 

Ques. 20. How many letters did witness receive from the 
accused, which were addressed to witness as chairman of the 
Committee of investigation appointed at Port Gibson in Oct. 
1831 ? 

Ans. The records of the Presbytery will show. Upon a 
reference to the records, witness finds their number to be three. 
Witness states, that, as chairman of a Committee of investiga- 
tion appointed at Port Gibson in Oct. 1831, he proceeded to 
New Orleans in December following ; that there he addressed 
the accused, on behalf of the Committee, four letters, to which 
he received three letters in reply ; that after the close of the 
correspondence on the part of the Committee, and before 
leaving New Orleans, witness, at the request of the accused, 
promised to write him as a friend, and freely express his 
mind. This he did, in a letter dated January 7, 1832, in the 
close of which he requests the accused, if he have any reply 
to make to the suggestions of witness in the aforesaid letter, 
to make them addressed to the Committee of investigation. 
Witness afterwards received a letter from the accused, dated 
February 17, 1832, which, from its tenor, witness judged was 
a reply to his own private letter, and not intended for the 
Committee of investigation. It now appears from the repre- 
sentations of the accused, that he (the accused) did intend it for 
the Committee of investigation. Witness is willing, therefore, 
that it should be so considered. At the request of the accus- 
ed (witness understands) that both the aforesaid letters were 
read to the Presbytery, and are now upon record. 

Ques. 21. Will witness state when the last printed extracts 
from the records of the Presbytery were published ? 



310 



Ans. About the first of March, as far as witness can remem- 
ber. 

Ques. 22. Has witness, during his long intercourse with the 
accused, discovered any want of candour and sincerity on the 
part of the accused in the exhibition of his doctrinal views ? 

Arts. This is a painful question. In the latter part of the 
intercourse between witness and the accused, witness is oblig- 
ed to say that many things have occurred calculated to leave 
the impression upon the mind of witness, that he held language 
and expressed views in presence of witness different from the 
language and views expressed before others. Witness has 
informed the accused in a letter (now upon record at the re- 
quest of the accused), that such is the painful conviction lefl 
upon his mind. 

Ques. 23. Will witness state whether he ever heard the ac- 
cused affirm that the pastoral letter sent by the Presbytery to 
the first Presbyterian church in New Orleans, was false in de- 
tail and in toto ? 

Ans. Not that I remember. The accused has denied the 
accuracy of the above letter, but in what particular points wit- 
ness does not now recollect. 

Ques. 24. Does witness recollect of having conversed with 
the accused on his preaching against the doctrines contained 
in the Confession of Faith between April 1827 and April 
1828 ? 

Ans. I do not. 

Ques. 25. Did witness converse with the accused on said 
subject in the spring of 1829 ? 

Ans._ I think it likely, but I have no recollection of the fact 
of such conversation. 

Ques. 26. Will witness state whether any part of the diffi- 
culties between the Presbytery and the accused were settled 
at the meeting at Port Gibson in October 1831 1 

Ans. I think no part of them. 

Ques. 27. Does witness remember that the name of the ac- 
cused was not inserted upon the list of members at the meet- 
ing at Port Gibson till the second day 1 

dx#s Witness recollects that no notification was officially 



311 



made to the stated clerk of this Presbytery by the stated clerk 
of the General Assembly, by which Mr. Clapp was declared 
to be a member of the Mississippi Presbytery and amenable 
to them. He thinks there might have been some debate as 
to the propriety of re-entering the name of Mr. Clapp upon 
the roll of the Presbytery without such a notification, but the 
record of the Presbytery will shew that this objection was 
waived at the request of Mr. Clapp. 

Ques. 28. Will witness state what (according to the rules of 
doing business in this Presbytery) has been intended by the 
language, " to receive and act upon a resolution." 

Ans. " To receive and act upon a resolution," means that 
one member should offer a resolution, and another should se- 
cond it, when it is open for amendment, postponement, &c. 
and finally subject to adoption or rejection. 

Ques. 29. Will witness state whether he considered me a 
member of the Mississippi Presbytery prior to their resolution 
to recognize me as a member recorded on the 46th page of 
the last printed extracts of the Presbytery ? 

Ans. There might be some debate as to mere formality ; 
but witness would have considered, and perhaps did then con- 
sider, Mr. Clapp virtually a member of the Presbytery and 
subject to their jurisdiction. The resolution of the Presbyte- 
ry recognizing the resolutions of the General Assembly was 
necessary as forming a part of the history of the Presbytery. 
There was no essential difficulty in the recognition of Mr. 
Clapp as I considered. 

Ques. 30. Does not witness recollect stating to the accused, 
that, in consequence of the above resolution, the accused would 
be called upon to give reasons for absence, if absent during 
the remaining session of said Presbytery ? 

Ans. Witness does not recollect, but thinks it possible he 
may have said so. 

Ques. 31. Does witness remember the debate in the Pres- 
bytery at Port Gibson on the letter of the accused of March 
5th, 1830, requesting dismission ? 

Ans. He does recollect something of it. His recollection 
is to this amount : — the resolution of the General Assembly 



312 



was considered as replacing Mr. Clapp in the Mississippi 
iPresbytery ; and of consequence he was to be regarded in the 
light in which he last appeared before the Presbytery, which 
was by his letter of March 5th, 1830, requesting a dismission. 
The question then was, what should be our present action 
upon that letter? The decision of the Presbytery, (so far as I 
am acquainted with their views at that time,) would probably 
have been to arraign Mr. Clapp for errors in doctrine. He, 
however, requested leave to withdraw that letter, upon the 
ground that it did not present a fair view of the opinions he 
then entertained ; that was the original form of his request. 
The Presbytery were unwilling to grant a request of this 
kind, until they had some evidence of the fact of such a change 
in his views as would satisfy them that the letter should be 
withdrawn. Mr. Clapp then appended to his request this 
condition : — that he could make it appear he had not essen- 
tially departed from the acknowledged and distinguishing te- 
nets of the Presbyterian church. The understanding was, that 
Mr. Clapp would, in writing, attempt such an explanation or 
make such a disavowal as would furnish definite ground for 
the future action of the Presbytery. The letter requesting 
leave to withdraw the aforesaid letter of March 5th, 1830, is 
on the record and file of the Presbytery. 

Ques. 32. Will witness state whether he recollects hearing 
any reasons assigned in the Presbytery at Port Gibson for 
changing the Committee of prosecution against the accused 
of which he was chairman into a Committee of investiga- 
tion, except those which are mentioned in the resolution on 
page 61 of the last printed extracts from the records of the 
Presbytery ? 

Ans. Suspicions were expressed by some members of the 
Presbytery openly, but, as witness thinks, improperly (at that 
time), of the sincerity of the views of the accused as ex- 
pressed through the Committee of conference in the written 
questions and answers. A few of the younger members of 
the Presbytery had previously advocated the propriety of de- 
claring that the Presbytery was satisfied with the correctness 
of Mr. Clapp's present views as communicated by the Com- 



313 



mittee of conference ; but it was finally concluded that it 
was the most advisable course to make further investigation 
before the Presbytery determined upon a final course of pro- 
ceeding. As the Presbytery, therefore, were not prepared to 
commence a prosecution, they determined to change the name 
of the Committee which they had previously appointed as a 
Committee of prosecution, and commit the business of investi- 
gation to them. 

Ques. 33. Will witness say, according to the best of his re- 
collection, whether the business of the Presbytery at Port 
Gibson in 1831 was not conducted in peace and harmony ? 

Ans. I never knew a meeting of this Presbytery, since I 
have been a member of it, which might not be said to be har- 
monious. If an exception is to be made, it is in the case of 
the meeting in Port Gibson. As witness has before stated, 
considerable discrepancy of opinion and feeling was appa- 
rent during the course of the proceedings in relation to Mr. 
Clapp. 

Ques. 34. Will witness state whether he remembers the 
facts on which was based the opinion expressed in his letter 
to the accused dated January 7, 1832, (and on the records of 
the Presbytery), that "if the interrogatories signed by the 
" accused at Port Gibson were spread before the public at 
" New Orleans, universal astonishment would be the conse- 
" quence ?" 

Ans. Witness, and perhaps other members of this Presby- 
tery, had communicated the general nature and some of the 
particulars of those questions to individuals in New Orleans, 
and had heard astonishment expressed. From this he judged 
that this astonishment would be general. If he were mis- 
taken in this, it would be matter of gratification to him. 

CROSS EXAMINED BY THE C03IMITTEE OF PROSECUTION. 

Ques. 35. Witness, in his answer to question 6th, stated that, 
according to his best recollection, observations were then 
made by the accused, which implied that the accused would 
consider himself justified, even if the most natural construe- 



« 



314 

tion oF those words had been the one intended. Will witness 
state what those observations were ? 

Ans. There are six individuals mentioned in the letter of 
the accused August 10, 1831, whose opposition to him " ori- 
nated in gross iniquity." In the conversation alluded to in 
the 6th question, many circumstances were mentioned by the 
accused to witness (as it appeared to him) in justification of 
the above-cited language. As the accused expresses a readi- 
ness to hear those circumstances recited, witness, with great 
reluctance, states as follows : — all the minutia of the statement 
made by the accused are not distinctly remembered. An oc- 
currence which took place in the family of Mr. Farrie, was 
alleged as the ground of his enmity. The enmity of Mrs. 
Hill was accounted for by alleging another circumstance, 
which, however, the witness does not now recollect. And 
Mrs. Hearsey's opposition was in like manner accounted for, 
by alleging that the accused had once freely animadverted 
upon some imprudent conduct upon her part ; particulars of 
which were then mentioned, but are not now recollected, 
although of one thing witness is certain : — that they were de- 
rogatory to Mrs. Hearsey, and, if true, would in reality serve 
to account for her opposition to Mr. Clapp. These indivi- 
duals were highly respected by witness, and he was far from 
believing that any of the causes alleged were the motives of 
their conduct towards the accused. Of the other individuals 
named in the letter, witness will say nothing ; general bad feel- 
ings being the alleged ground of their opposition so far as he 
recollects. 

Ques. 36. Were these explanations of the interrogatories 
on the printed extracts, pages 60 and 61, given by the Com- 
mittee of conference or the accused to the Presbytery, to in- 
duce the Presbytery to suppose that the accused intended to 
convey any other views to the Presbytery than those literally 
and plainly implied in the interrogatories themselves ? 

Ans. There were none. 

Resolved, that we adjourn to meet at Mr. Bisland's at half 
past 6 o'clock, P. M. Concluded with prayer. 



315 



Half past 6 o'clock, P. M» 
The Presbytery met according to adjournment ; opened 
with prayer. 

Resumed the testimony of Mr. Potts. 

Ques. 37. by the accused, by permission. Will witness 
state whether he has in his possession the letter addressed to 
witness by the accused, in which it is alleged that the accus- 
ed slandered certain professing Christians of New Orleans ; 
and whether he can conveniently place it in the hands of the 
moderator ? 

Ans. That letter has been, and is now (he believes), in the 
hands of the prosecuting Committee. That part of it which 
was believed to be relevant to the charges against the accus- 
ed is already on record as part of the testimony in support 
of one of these charges. 

Here the letter referred to in the above question was placed 
in the hands of the moderator by the chairman of the Com- 
mittee of prosecution, and the accused having expressed his 
belief that the parts of the letter not recorded had a bearing 
on the extract from it, adduced by the Committee of prose- 
tion as evidence against the accused, the whole letter was, at 
the request of the accused, ordered to be recorded, and is as 
follows: viz. 

"New Orleans, Jug. 10th, 1831. 
" Dear Sir. — I fear that the perusal of the following reply 
to your letter dated 29th of last month, will be an oppressive 
tax on your time and industry. I wish to make a full, plain, 
and explicit statement of my views on the principal topics in 
j'our last letter to some members of the Mississippi Presby- 
ter} 7 . I prefer making it to you for two reasons : first, I be- 
lieve you to be the most prominent and influential member of 
that respectable body ; secondly, I feel more intimately ac- 
quainted with you than any other member of the Presbytery. 
I will add, that although some things have occurred between 
us during the two past years that seem to me strange, unac- 
countable, yet I rely with much confidence in your acknow- 

42 



316 



ledged high character for integrity, benevolence, candour, and 
moderation. I shall aim to be free and frank. I hope you 
will forgive whatever in this communication may appear to 
you, either as to manner or matter, to be an offensive, harsh, 
or unchristian spirit ; I hope you will meet with nothing of 
this discription. Sure I am, that nothing grieves me so much, 
in a retrospect of the past, as the memory of the instances in 
which, not so much my spirit as my language and manners, 
have been contradictory to the established laws of Christian 
civility. Forgive me also, if, in doing what I consider justice 
to myself, I shall advert to some things of a disagreeable nature, 
calculated to awaken painful emotions. If possible, I would 
make my letter agreeable in every particular ; this I shall 
attempt, and hope the attempt will prove successful 

" You say that you are sorry, on my own account, that the 
decision of the Presbytery was not sustained, because by that 
decision my connexion with all churches professing Calvinis- 
tic sentiments was dissolved, while at the same time I was 
not deprived of any of my official endowments. Is this cor- 
rect? I have always reckoned as belonging to a bishop's en- 
dowments a commendatory letter attesting his Christian cha- 
racter or good standing as a minister of the Gospel ; with- 
out such an epistle, it seems to me he wants one essential 
qualification of a Presbyter as the church of Christ is at this 
day regulated. Is not a letter as necessary to the favourable 
reception and usefulness of a minister as those documents 
that are given to convince the public that he has been licensed 
or ordained ? Suppose that a member of the Natchez church 
should apply to you for a dismission to join some other church 
universally admitted to be orthodox ; and further, that the 
session should answer the petition by pronouncing this per- 
son to be no longer a member of the Presbyterian church or 
of the church in Natchez ; and lastly, by declaring that the 
doctrinal errors of this person were of such a serious nature 
that you could not conscientiously recommend him or her to 
the fellowship of any other orthodox church ; w 7 ould not this 
amount, in fact, to an excommunication ? Is it lawful to ex- 
communicate any one without giving him or her a hearing ? 



31? 



Is not my case precisely parallel to the one above-mention* 
ed ? I would not dispute about mere words. It is perfectly 
plain to me, that to declare a member of your body to be no 
longer connected with the Mississippi Presbytery or the Pres- 
byterian church, and, on account of fundamental errors, to be 
unworthy the fellowship of orthodox Christians, is virtually 
an expulsion from the ministry and the church. So has every 
minister that I have conversed with on the subject thought, 
and, if I have not been misinformed, such was the prevalent 
opinion on the floor of the General Assembly. But it has 
been said, that you only granted my petition. Is this asser- 
tion correct ! I think not. My words were plain and unambi* 
guous. I prayed to be dismissed, not from the Presbyterian 
church, but merely from the Mississippi Presbytery, to join 
another body. It is certainly unlawful to dismiss or suspend 
one against his consent, and that without the benefit of a trial, 
and with a stigma upon him interdicting his fellowship with 
any orthodox church. On this point (dear Sir), it seems to 
me there is no room for diversity of sentiment. Observe, that 
I cordially and gladly admit the purity of your motives, in- 
tentions ; but it is permitted me, I presume, to express the 
opinion that you erred in judgment, since no body of men 
is at this day, however enlightened and pious, infallible. If 
you had given me a commendatory epistle, I should have been 
entirely satisfied. I shall never attempt, w T hile in disgrace, to 
join any other denomination. A good character is with me 
every thing ; and I am the more anxious to vindicate mine, 
because I am conscious that I have not thought, done, nor 
said any thing justly tending to its injury. Viewing the sub- 
ject in this light, it was with no small surprise that I read the 
declaration in your last letter, that you were sorry the Ge- 
neral Assembly had not sanctioned the decisions of the Presby- 
tery, — decisions that cut me off irrecoverably, and without the 
privilege of a hearing, from the whole orthodox community, 
What, has the General Assembly done wrong in deciding that 
I was entitled to a trial ? Surely that part of your letter was 
written without your usual reflection. But you say that I had 
acknowleged myself to be no Calvinist, and therefore should 



318 



not, by my own confession, belong to your body. Now I 
think I can convince you that 1 have never made any such 
acknowledgment, if the word Calvinist be understood ac- 
cording to its usual aeception at the present time throughout 
the American churches. True, in my letter of March 5th, 
1830, I aver that I disbelieve what I consider to be the 
peculiar doctrines of Calvinism ; meaning the peculiar doc- 
trines of John Calvin, not those of the majority that call them- 
selves Calvrnists at the present day. You may inquire, then ? 
why I was not more explicit in that epistle ? I will gire the 
true answer to this interrogatory frankly. The letter was 
written without the remotest suspicion that the Presbytery 
would regard its contents as an indirect confession of heresy r 
or such a departure from Calvinism as to render it improper 
for me longer to continue attached to a Calvinistic communi- 
ty, I felt, at the time, that the succinct statement of my doc- 
trinal views which it presented, would be liable to be misun- 
derstood by those not miimaldy acquainted with me. I re- 
lied on you, an intimate friend, to make in my behalf those 
commentaries and illustrations requisite to impart to those of 
the brethren who were strangers to me a complete and full 
knowledge of my views. Towards you I cherished most 
entire regard and the strongest fraternal affection, which I 
hope I shall never lose, in whatever manner you may here- 
after treat me. I felt that my interests would be safe in your 
hands. From that meeting of the Presbytery you were de- 
tained by ill health. There was no one present so particu- 
larly informed with respect to my sentiments as to be com- 
petent to vindicate my cause, and to this hour I believe the 
Presbytery is ignorant of my peculiar views ;T mean the views 
I then held, on the 5th of March 1830. Permit me to ex- 
plain them. 

1st. In my letter I denied the doctrine of unconditional 
election and reprobation, which I believe Calvin maintained. 
By the language, unconditional election and reprobation, I 
meant supralapsarianism. A supralapsarian is one who holds 
that God, antecedent to the fall of man or any knowledge of 
it, decreed the apostacy and all its consequences, determining 



319 



to save some and condemn others ; and that in all these he 
considers his own glory only. Now I cannot see how God 
could decree a thing antecedently to his knowing it, I find no 
such doctrine in the Bible. I do not like the word decrees, 
but am not disposed to quarrel about mere terms. I adopt, 
and always have adopted. 4he definition of election prevalent 
in New England when I lived there, and now prevalent, as 
I believe, not only there, but throughout the Presbyterian 
church. It is as follows : — all of God's works are according 
to a plan ; or, in other words, ail things existing throughout 
the universe of God are accordant with his infinite, eternal, 
and incomprehensible plan or purpose. I do not mean that 
every thing which occurred is agreeable to the holy w T ill of 
God, as it regards moral character ; but simply that nothing 
takes place unforeseen by God, unprovided for, or in opposi- 
tion to the immense, boundless, and unsearchable scheme of 
the divine operations. Now, Sir, let me ask, what is there 
heterodox in all this ? I know there are some supralapsarians* 
a few, I believe, in our Presbytery ; but do they constitute 
a majority (my views have not vacillated on election, except 
as to the word permission) on this subject. 

" 2d. With respect to the atonement ; I believe that it is ge- 
neral, or that it is sufficient for all mankind, and actually de- 
signed for as many as will believe. Calvin believed that the 
atonement was limited. 

" 3d. Calvin believed in the literal imputation of Adam's 
sin to his posterity. I adopt the opinions of Turretin, whom 1 
read much, and the more I read the better I like him, — that 
the sin of Adam cannot be properly and personally ours, be- 
cause we were not yet in existence. It is not correct to say that 
a person sinned before he had a being. But I believe, that in 
consequence of Adam's fall, all mankind become sinners as 
soon as they are capable of it ; and that unless prevented by 
the sovereign, distinguishing, and unmerited grace of God 
through Christ, all mankind would go on sinning forever, and 
be forever wretched. Is not this the doctrine of our church ? 
a church to which my attachment is not less than yours (as I 
believe.) The author of a piece on the doctrine of Imputa- 



320 



lion, in the Biblical Repertory for July, 1830, avers, that by 
the phraseology, imputation of Adam's sin, our church does 
not understand that all mankind were actually identified with 
Adam in his first transgression, nor that there is any transfer 
of the moral turpitude of Adam's sin to his posterity. I quote 
from memory, but feel quite sure that I have given the sense 
of the author correctly, if not his identical words. With the 
above explanation I can cordially subscribe to the doctrine of 
the imputation of Adam's sin to his posterity, though I should 
prefer the adoption of a different phraseology to express the 
idea. 

" 4th. Calvin believed in irresistible grace. My opinion is, 
that the Holy Spirit regenerates the soul in conversion ; 
breathes into it a new, spiritual, holy principle of life. But I 
deny the propriety of applying the epithet irresistible to the 
divine influences concerned in regeneration. My views con- 
cerning the agency that renews the soul, are happily express- 
ed by Dr. D wight in his System of Theology, vol. iii. 72 ser- 
mon, p. 39. This author says that the agency in question is 
not irresistible, but that in all cases it is unresisted. Further, 
I believe that in regeneration the soul is active ; or, in other 
words, that it is acted upon in accordance with the laws of 
mind. In all this, do I not harmonize with the majority of 
our church ? On these four particulars my present views are 
the same which I entertained in March 1830. 

" 5th. I come now to the last article, — the final perseverance 
of Christians. The sentiments I entertained on this doctrine 
the winter before last are imperfectly expressed in my letter 
to the Presbytery, dated 5th of March, 1830. I then be- 
lieved that real Christians do sometimes fall from grace in 
this life, but that none once truly converted will be finally 
and forever lost. Yet, at that time, I believed that the doc- 
trine, as above stated, could not be proved from Scripture ; in 
other words, I thought that reason was in favour of the doc- 
trine, but that the Bible had left it undecided. The loose 
way in which I then expressed myself arose from haste. I 
hardly read the letter after it was written, took no copy of it, 



321 



and never thought of it being recorded against me, and circu- 
lated, without note or comment, all over the United States. 

" Within the last year I have re-examined the Scriptural 
position of this doctrine, and, after much diligent search, and I 
hope earnest prayer, have come to the conclusion that it is 
supported by the following texts of Scripture, John, v. 34. 
vi. 37. x. 9. Romans, xi. 29. 2d Timothy, ii. 19. On the 
other hand, there are some texts against the doctrine which I 
cannot explain, but do not on that account conclude that they 
are inexplicable. At the present time I believe the doctrines 
of election, atonement, original sin, conversion, and perseve- 
rance, as above explained ; nor has there been any material 
change of my views, that I know of, since my letter to the 
Presbytery of March 5th, 1830, except as to the last-men- 
tioned doctrine. Indeed, this change, in my poor opinion, is 
not material. I could name several Presbyterian clergymen 
who have told me, that in their opinion, subscription to this 
article should not be made essential to a standing in the Pres- 
byterian church. Does not that great and good man, Robert 
Hall, so decide, when he says that no error of doctrine, not in- 
compatible with salvation, should be considered as legitimate 
ground for debarring from the privileges of the church ? Now, 
Sir, let me ask you if it is in your power to believe that there 
is a Presbytery in the United States who would decide that 
my views on the above specified points were essentially un- 
sound, and so anticalvinistic that 1 could not with propriety 
continue to be a Presbyterian minister ? You speak of my 
recanting. Now, Sir, convince me that I am in error, point 
out my errors, and I will publicly abjure them. Convince the 
church that my aberrations from truth or holiness are essen- 
tial, I shall esteem it a great favour ; will ask her pardon and 
her prayers that I may be restored to the path of wisdom and 
pleasantness. 

" To me it seems strange that the Presbytery did not pro- 
ceed with more deliberation, with less precipitancy ; that they 
did not adopt more of the caution and kindness, the mild and 
conciliatory measures recommended in our Book of Disci- 
pline towards those who are suspected of holding erroneous 



322 



sentiments. Many intelligent Christians have remarked to 
me, that on the very face of your proceedings are marks of an 
harshness and severity which they could not account for. It 
is possible that I have information with respect to the senti- 
ments of the Christian community on this subject which has 
not reached you. The Presbytery always appeal to my let- 
ter as furnishing a vindication of the course they pursued ; 
that letter has been read by not a few intelligent ministers of 
our church, who think, that in every point of doctrine men- 
tioned in the letter, excepting the last, I symbolize with the 
majority of the Presbyterian ministers in the United States. 
They think it strange that the Presbytery should not have 
been in possession of this fact. Again, they say, that what- 
ever errors any publication of mine, either in manuscript or 
print, might in the opinion of the Presbytery contain, you had 
no right to decide on them in my absence. Language at the 
best is imperfect, and no minister of the Gospel can be law- 
fully censured for any language that he may use, until the 
body authorized to censure has heard his exegesis or expla- 
nation of his language. This is the universal sentiment. I 
write not thus to wound your feelings ; I am anxious, if pos- 
sible, to merit and to possess your good opinion and brotherly 
affection. But this affair is now before the Christian public, 
and it is desirable that all concerned should know what are 
the most prevalent views in regard it. In the pastoral letter 
the measures of the Presbytery towards me in 1826 and 1830 
are connected. I do not see the propriety of this, for my 
letter of March, 1830, was a new thing, and no antecedent 
measures of the Mississippi Presbytery can have a bearing 
thereon. 

" Knowing that the decisions of the Presbytery might be 
sustained by the General Assembly, I had prepared for publi- 
cation on the subject what would serve to fill a pamphlet in 
the octavo form of near three hundred pages. Had the de- 
cision of the General Assembly been against me, it would 
have been published this month. I rejoice that it is not yet 
necessary to do it ; not on my own account, for I still think 
that the publication would do me a great deal of good, but be* 



323 



cause it necessarily contains some things which would be gra- 
tifying to the enemies of religion. The above-mentioned 
manuscripts are, as it seems to me, a faithful and correct ex- 
hibition of all matters appertaining to the Presbyterian church 
in the states of Louisiana and Mississippi for the last ten years. 
For such a work I have materials of which you are not aware, 
enabling me to draw a pretty exact portrait, not only of 
things but also of persons. My only object in preparing it 
was self-defence — that I might convince the American public 
of the purity of my motives, character, and conduct ; and that 
I might leave to my children the legacy of a bright, unsullied 
reputation. I have not shown the manuscript to an indivi- 
dual, not even to my wife ; and if the Presbytery do me justice, 
respecting which I have no doubt, it shall never see the light ; 
it shall be consigned to the flames that it may never fall into 
the hands of our enemies. To them it would be a feast in- 
deed. I do think, Sir, that you and I both have cause to be 
thankful for the late decision of the General Assembly. I 
hate religious warfare. I attack no one ; but must defend 
myself. I do not boast ; but will say with respect to any con- 
test into which I may be forced, that though I may not come 
out of it entirely unscathed,— 

' Who conquers me, shaH find a stubborn foe.' 

" In case of a fight, 

' Our men in buckram shall have blows enough, 

« And feel they too are penetrable stuff.' Brnoir. 

" (Forgive the above ebullition of parson Clapp's folly.) 

" I am not able to account for the distrust and suspicion, 
with respect to my integrity and piety, that have apparently 
been excited in the minds of many of the Presbytery ; it 
would oblige me exceedingly to be informed on this subject. 
What have you seen in me that justifies a suspicion as to my 
sincerity ? I am told that you reason in this way : — my sub- 
scription to the Confession of Faith was insincere, ^nd he who 
can practise insincerity on a subject so sacred, must want 
common honesty. I admit the conclusion, but deny, most 

43 



324 



positively, the premises. I have never made a false statement 
of my doctrinal views, either in or out of the pulpit, since I 
have been a preacher of the Gospel. Again : I am told that 
you think my general style of preaching contradicts the senti- 
ments which I avowed to the Presbytery. If such be your 
opinion, allow me to say it is entirely erroneous. Why do 
you think so ? Is it because you have been told so ? Dr. 
Miller, in his letters on clerical manners, makes the following 
remarks : — * It is almost incredible how little reliance can be 
1 placed on reports, circulated even by good people, and ac- 
4 companied with all the minute circumstances of time and 

* place ; and how utterly unsafe it is to investigate their truth, 

* because an investigation cannot be conducted without repeat- 

* ing the story and giving it additional currency.' (See page 
95.) Now, I fear you have relied too much on such reports. 
I have traced several reports as to my preaching, doctrines, 
and conduct, in which there is not a particle of truth, to some 
of the following persons : — Messrs. Rollins, Ross, Farrie, Cald- 
well ; and to Madams Hearsey and Hill. Now, if you knew 
what I know, you would not credit what they say. If I am 
ever permitted to have a conversation with you, I will con- 
vince you that the opposition of the above-named persons is 
to be ascribed to iniquity, gross iniquity, which is not known 
publicly, and I hope never will be till the day of judgment. I 
cannot put what I allude to on paper, and I make this com- 
munication in confidence. I can convince you that from those 
persons I have suffered immensely, and in silence, because I 
do not wish to injure the cause of religion. 

" This is a strange world, and my circumstances have, per- 
haps, enabled me to see more of it than you have ; at any rate 
I have taken a deeper view of things in this place than you 
are aware of. Let me put you on your guard as to Mr. Silas 
Hazard. He means well, doubtless ; but his nearest relations 
and best friends admit, that for some reason or other he is ex- 
tremely apt to misunderstand and misreport what he has heard 
in conversation. I intend to be at the next meeting of the Pres- 
bytery if my life and health are spared. I am entirely alone ; 
My family is in Cincinnati, and will remain there during the 



325 



sickly season, whither they have gone for the benefit of our 
daughter's health, who suffers much from teething. I shall 
keep a copy of this letter, not because I distrust you in the 
least, but for fear this may not reach you. I intended to have 
touched on many other topics, but will weary you no more at 
present. If I should not be at the Presbytery, in consequence 
of any unforeseen occurrence (sickness or death), I beg of you 
the favour to carry this letter to the Presbytery, and read it 
to them, (except the confidential part about Caldwell and 
others.) Shew this to none. And I beg of you also to give 
it an attentive perusal, and let me know what are my faults, 
that I may reform. I confide in you. I am sure you must 
sympathize with me, if you reflect what must have been my 
emotions when I found myself deserted by my brethren ; not 
only deserted, but denounced as an heretic ; a disowned and 
disgraced minister, and that all over the country, while at 
the same time I was conscious that I had done nothing to 
merit such treatment. God grant that you may never expe- 
rience the bitterness of such a cup. My sensibility to charac- 
ter is lively. I accuse no one ; I forgive all. I harbour no 
resentment. I would not inflict on my bitterest enemy the 
sufferings of which the Presbytery has been the occasion to 
me, innocently no doubt. 

" I am, Sir, trulv your friend, 

" T. CLAPP. 

" Rev. George Potts. 
" My love to your family." 

Ques. 38. Can witness furnish any information in relation 
to the nature of the explanations of the accused made to the 
Committee of conference ? 

Am. I know of no explanations made to that Committee 
which would qualify the sense of the questions and replies re- 
ported to the Presbytery by that Committee ; and if it be per- 
mitted, witness can state that he has in his possession a letter 
from Mr. Newton, a member of that Committee, in which it 
is declared that whatever explanations the accused might 
have made before said Committee, no language was used in 



326 



Mr. Newton's hearing calculated in the least degree to weaken 
the impression made upon his mind, that the questions pro- 
pounded by the Committee and categorically answered by 
the accused were to be understood unambiguously, according 
to the sense customarily attached to the words used, and were 
expressive of his real sentiments at that time. 

Ques. 39. by Mr. Blair. Does witness recollect hearing 
the accused express his views on the doctrine of the Holy 
Trinity? 

Jlns. The views expressed by the accused to witness seem- 
ed to him capable of such an interpretation as would make 
them consistent with the doctrine of the Holy Trinity as taught 
in the Confession of Faith. At the same time, there was (as 
it appeared to witness) a needless repudiation of the phraseo- 
logy long used, and now thoroughly understood, in reference 
to personality. The language of the accused would have led 
witness to believe that the accused held a modal Trinity ; in 
other words, that he was a Sabelliam At the same time wit- 
ness states that he has always heard from the accused a denial 
of the correctness of such inference. 

Ques. 40. by Mr. Chase. Has witness heard the accused 
express his views respecting a belief in the divinity of Christ 
being essential to salvation ? 

Ans. Witness believes that he has heard the accused ad- 
vance opinions which directly involve the charge that the ac- 
cused did not deem the doctrine of the proper and essential 
divinity of Christ one of the fundamental and essential doc- 
trines of Christianity, a belief of which was indispensable to 
salvation ; that he taught there might be doubts upon that 
point compatible with a reliance upon Christ as a Saviour ; 
that in our arguments upon that subject we are to go upon the 
supposition of our own fallibility ; that pious Unitarians are 
to be admitted to the communion of the church ; that we have 
no right to ask any other question, than that asked by the 
Apostles, of candidates for admission to church privileges : viz. 
" Do you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ ?" that there were 
arguments in favour of Unitarianism which could not be an- 
swered, which expression he afterwards corrected, and said 



327 



had not been answered. Upon being desired to quote one of 
those passages, he referred to Mark, xiii. 32. The interpreta- 
tion given by Trinitarians to this passage was then mentioned 
by witness, but was objected to by the accused as unsatisfac- 
tory. The accused offered no interpretation, while, at the 
same time, he distinctly declared his belief that the Scripture 
evidence for the divinity of Christ was preponderant. This, 
and other conversations held with the accused, has impressed 
the mind of witness that the views of the accused, with regard 
to the doctrine of the proper divinity and expiatory sacrifice 
of Christ, were latitudinarian and highly dangerous. Wit- 
ness has heard of many similar expressions upon the part of 
the accused, but he is now giving the substance of conversa- 
tions held with himself, or in his presence. 

Ques. 41. by the accused, by permission. Cannot witness 
remember, when conversing with the accused in Natchez 
concerning the letter of the accused to witness, in which 
it is said that disrespectful mention is made of the name of 
Mrs. Hearsey and others, that the accused expressed his be- 
lief that the opposition to the accused in New Orleans chief- 
ly originated in the iniquity of certain individuals then named, 
and now non-residents of that city. 

Ans. Witness now remembers that mention was made of 
those individuals now non-residents, and who have not been 
in New Orleans for some years. Mr. Levi Beebee, General 
Whittlesey, Mrs. Woodrow, and Moses Cox, were names 
mentioned upon that occasion ; but it was difficult, (not to 
say impossible,) for witness to perceive the connection be- 
tween these individuals and some of those mentioned in that 
letter. 

Ques. 42. by the accused, by permission. Does not witness 
remember that the accused, in said conversation about said 
letter, admitted that the professing Christians therein named, 
then living in New Orleans, were probably sincere ; but that 
their opposition to the accused could be traced to personal 
difficulties between them and the accused ? 

Ans. He said this : but I must say that it is a habit with 
the accused to say exceedingly severe things, impeaching, as 



328 



I should think, the moral character of individuals, while he 
commonly appends the remark that he did not call in ques- 
tion their sincerity or impugn their motives. 

Ques. 43. Did witness hear the accused, in said conversa- 
tion, bring any specific charges against the professors of reli- 
gion therein-named, then living in New Orleans, impeaching 
their moral or religious character ? 

Jlns. He brought no specific charges, so far as witness can 
recollect, affecting their moral honesty ; but the declaration 
was made at that time, that he did not wish to say of them 
all that he might say of them. Witness remembers, also, 
mention was made of various occurrences as he has stated in 
a former reply, intended as an explanation of the alleged per- 
sonal hostility of these individuals to the accused. 

Ques. 44. Does witness recollect that the accused gave him 
permission to publish the entire letter, in which mention was 
made of these individuals, if he thought duty required it ? 

Jlns. Such permission was given, as is already on record. 

Ques. 45. by the accused, by permission. Will witness 
state, whether he remembers, that when conversing with the 
accused about admitting Unitarians to communion, the ac- 
cused admitted that it was not right for a Presbyterian minis- 
ter to receive them into church communion ? 

Ans. Witness was not aware that there could be any dis- 
tinction between the practice and the precept of a minister 
upon so important a point ; but such a distinction was first 
made by the accused to witness in a clear and positive man- 
ner, in the correspondence between the accused and witness 
as chairman of the Committee of investigation. Since that 
time the accused has defended that distinction in relation to 
church communion, upon the principles that it is right to sub- 
mit to the judgment of a majority. 

Ques. 46. by the accused, by permission. Does witness re- 
member that the accused, shortly after his return to New Or- 
leans from Port Gibson in October 1831, addressed a letter 
to witness requesting witness to forward to Mr. Farrie with- 
out delay a copy of the letter in which said Fame's name, 
according to rumour, was used disrespectfully ? 



329 



Ans. Yes ; and so much of the said letter as related to Mr* 
Farrie and others, was, at the request of Mr. Farrie and the 
accused, transmitted to Mr. Farrie. 

Ques. 47. by the moderator. Have you any further testi- 
mony to offer, either for or against the accused, in relation to 
these charges ? 

Ans. It is with most painful regret that witness has been 
cited by the accused in relation to these charges. He could 
state many things tending to the praise of the accused. He 
has always entertained a high admiration for his ability, and 
for many traits of generosity. Nothing but a solemn convic- 
tion of his obligations to what witness believes the cause of 
God and truth, would have involved him in the painful neces- 
sity of rupturing ties of personal intercourse which at a for- 
mer time united them. If he has failed of tenderness, and 
affectionate and faithful dealing with the accused, he is uncon- 
scious of it. 

Resolved, that we adjourn to meet in the school-house at 
8 o'clock to-morrow morning. Concluded with prayer. 

December 18, 1832. 
Tuesday, 8 o^clock, A. M. 
The Presbytery met according to adjournment. Opened 
with prayer. 

The testimony of the Rev. George Potts was read to him 
in the presence of the parties, and approved, and the witness 
discharged. 

The Rev. William C. Blair was introduced by the accused, 
and being duly sworn, testified as follows, viz : 

Ques. 1. Will witness state whether he heard the accused, 
at any time during the meeting of the Presbytery at Port Gib- 
son in October 1831, publicly avow his sentiments concerning 
the decrees of God, and what were these sentiments ? 

Ans. Witness recollects that the accused, at the close of 
his sermon on the evening of the first day of that meeting of 
the Presbytery, alluded to a dissatisfaction which he said he 



330 



had been informed some members of the church had express- 
ed in relation to a preceding discourse, but cannot recollect 
any statements which he then made of his views. 

Ques. 2. Does witness recollect the proceedings of the 
Presbytery at Port Gibson in October 1831 with respect to 
the difficulties between said body and the accused ? 

Ans. Witness recollects most of the facts connected with 
the proceedings of the Presbytery in relation to the accused 
at that time, but after so great a lapse of time cannot pre- 
tend to perfect accuracy as to the order in which these facts 
occurred. The first act of the Presbytery, in relation to Mr. 
Clapp's case, was recognizing the resolutions of the General 
Assembly, (which were read from a newspaper,) as authen- 
tic, although no copy of those resolutions certified by the 
stated clerk had been received by the Presbytery. The want 
of this recognition of Mr. Clapp, however, previous to said 
act, did not appear to witness to be one of the difficulties 
between Mr. Clapp and the Presbytery. Witness recollects, 
amongst other things alleged why leave should not be grant- 
ed the accused to withdraw his letter of March 5th, 1830, 
that it was impracticable for the Presbytery to grant his re- 
quest, as the letter was on record, and had been the founda- 
tion of proceedings both in this body and the General Assem- 
bly. The Committee appointed to take into consideration 
the letter of the accused dated October 14, 1831, and ad- 
dressed to the moderator, were directed, besides examining 
the letter, to hold personal conference with the accused ; but 
no instructions were given them as to the manner in which 
that conference should be conducted. The object of the Pres- 
bytery, (as witness believes,) in appointing that Committee 
and directing them to confer with Mr. Clapp, w T as to obtain 
a clear explanation of the views he then entertained. The 
Committee retired to another part of the church, and there 
held their conference with the accused. On their return to 
the Presbytery, the chairman of that Committee expressed hi3 
readiness to report ; and, as well as witness recollects, he then 
stated to the Presbytery that his report was founded on cer- 
tain questions and answers contained in a paper which he 



331 



held in his hand, and which he proposed to read. After a 
short preface, he commenced reading ; but soon ceased, to 
make some further remarks, the object of which remarks 
appeared to be to convince the Presbytery that, in the an- 
swers to questions which he had commenced reading, the ac- 
cused intended to express the sentiments which we general- 
ly believed. Objections were then made by members of 
the Presbytery to the manner in which the chairman was 
presenting his report, and to the appearance of the paper from 
which he was reading. Witness does not recollect whether 
some members of the Presbytery suggested that the chair- 
man had better retire and complete his report, or whether 
he asked leave without such suggestion ; but witness is con- 
fident that the chairman retired without any formal vote of 
the Presbytery. After another short conference with the ac- 
cused, the chairman presented his report, together with the 
questions and answers as they appeared in the printed ex- 
tracts. This report having been accepted, it was moved that 
it be adopted, and its adoption was warmly advocated by a 
few members of the Presbytery ; but the motion to adopt 
was lost. A resolution was afterwards introduced by the 
Rev. Mr. Newton, (as witness believes,) which was substan- 
tially the same, and nearly the same in language, with the 
opinion expressed in the report which the Presbytery had just 
refused to adopt. This resolution was pronounced by the 
moderator to be out of order. Witness is not sure but that 
two or three other resolutions of a similar kind were attempt- 
ed to be introduced. The advocates of the accused then 
complained that they could not get the matter brought regular- 
ly before the Presbytery, inasmuch as a reconsideration could 
only be obtained by a motion to that effect from one of the 
majority and the concurrence of two thirds. One of them 
declared that he believed that if they could have a reconside- 
ration, a majority would then be in favour of adopting the 
report. To remove the ground of this complaint, those who 
had voted against adoption moved a reconsideration, and the 
motion was carried. The question was again put, whether 
the Presbytery would adopt the report of the Committee of 

44 



332 



conference, and decided in the negative. The accused then 
complained of the effect which was likely to be produced by 
the existence of a Committee of prosecution ; and some 
members of the Presbytery expressed their opinion, that until 
charges were ready to be brought forward in a regular man- 
ner, no Committee of Prosecution ought to exist. According- 
ly it was resolved to change the name of that Committee, and 
call it a Committee of investigation. 

Ques. 3. Will witness state if he understood the ground 
upon which the Presbytery neglected to insert the name of 
the accused on the list of its members during the first day of 
its session at Port Gibson in October 1831 ? 

Ans. Witness believes that the hesitation of the Presbytery, 
about inserting the name of the accused on the roll, proceed- 
ed entirely from the want of an authenticated copy of the said 
resolutions of the General Assembly declaring that the ac- 
cused ought to be regarded as a member of this Presbytery. 

Resolved, to have a recess for three quarters of an hour. 
After recess, resumed business, and proceeded to take the 
farther testimony of Mr. Blair, as follows, viz : 

Ques. 4. Cannot witness say that, according to rules of 
business adopted by the Presbytery, the reading of any por- 
tion of a written document in presence of the Presbytery by a 
chairman of a Committee, and as constituting a report which 
said Committee had proposed to offer and the Presbytery has 
agreed to hear, does not virtually and formally place said do- 
cument before the Presbytery ? 

Ans. Witness knows of no such rules of business adopted 
by this Presbytery as are supposed in the above questions, 
but believes that every member of this Presbytery has seen 
almost innumerable cases of the withdrawal of reports and 
resolutions by the persons offering them, on the suggestion of 
other members that they were imperfect or incomplete. 
Witness has considered the report of a Committee as the pro- 
perty of that Committee, until it is fully laid before the Pres- 
bytery and a motion made to accept it. Yet the Committee 



333 

being under the direction of the Presbytery, (though they have 
the entire control of their own report,) are considered as 
about to ask leave of the Presbytery to retire for the purpose 
of making such alterations or amendments as may appear to 
be necessary. This leave in such cases is usually granted by 
the fact of no one making objections. 

Ques. 5. Will witness state whether, according to the rules 
of transacting business in deliberative bodies, (so far as they 
have come to his knowledge,) it is within the province of said 
bodies to permit the withdrawal of the report of a Committee, 
unless said report be fairly before said body and subject to 
their disposal ? 

Ans. Witness does not understand what is intended in this 
question by the terms "unless said report be fairly before 
said body ;" but he believes that it is common in deliberative 
bodies for Committees to be permitted to withdraw, and alter 
or finish it if it be incomplete. 

Ques. 6. Does witness believe, that according to the rules 
of transacting business in deliberative bodies, it is in the pow- 
er of such body to grant to a Committee permission to with- 
draw from said body a document which is not before them ? 

Ans. The terms of the question are so framed as to involve 
an apparent absurdity ; but witness can state again, that he be- 
lieves deliberative bodies may and do allow Committees to 
withdraw, not only before they have completed the reading 
of the report, but even before they have commenced ; and wit- 
ness cannot see how such unfinished reports could be, accord- 
ing to his understanding of the terms, fairly before such bo- 
dies. 

Ques. 7. Does witness remember conversing with the ac- 
cused on the relation which an excommunicated member of 
our church sustains after said act of excommunication has 
been reversed by a superior judicatory ? 

Ans. Witness indistinctly recollects a conversation with the 
accused, in which the case of Dr. John Rollins of New Or- 
leans was spoken of ; and witness thinks that he expressed 
the opinion that the individual alluded to ought not to be al- 
lowed to take his place, and act as a member of that church, 



334 



until the session of said church should have authentic informa- 
tion of the decision of the higher judicatory by which they 
were required again to receive him ; or, in other words, that 
an act of the church session, recognizing him as a church mem- 
ber, was necessary. 

The Committee of prosecution declined asking any ques- 
tions. 

Ques. 8. by the Rev. B. Chase. Is it not, according to our 
usual custom of transacting business, the privilege of the chair- 
man of a Committee to withdraw his report at any stage of 
his progress in reading or presenting it to the Presbytery ? 

Ans. Witness believes it is ; but at the same time consider- 
ing the chairman bound to present a report either at a speci- 
fied time, or as soon as convenient, as the case may be ; and 
when he has announced his readiness to report, it would not 
be very decorous in him to withdraw without asking permis- 
sion. 

Ques. 9. by the moderator. Have you any further testi- 
mony, either for or against the accused, in relation to these 
charges ? 

Ans. I have not any. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in presence of 
the parties, approved, and the witness discharged. 

The Rev. George Potts took the chair, and the Rev. John 
H. Vancourt was introduced by the accused, and being duly 
sworn, testified as follows : viz. 

Ques. 1. Does witness recollect the time when the last 
printed extracts from the records of the Mississippi Presbytery 
were published ? 

Ans. He believes that it was in the first part of the month 
of March. 

Ques. 2. Does witness recollect whether any reasons were 
stated in the meeting of the Presbytery of January last, at the 
Institution of Learning, in support of the declaration found in 



335 



page 63 of printed extracts, that the result of the correspond- 
ence held by the Committee of investigation with the accused 
is not satisfactory ? If so, please state them. 

Am. Witness well recollects that the correspondence was 
laid before the Presbytery. He does not distinctly remember 
the remarks which were made, or the reasons assigned why 
the correspondence was considered unsatisfactory. In rela- 
tion to the reasons which influenced the mind of witness, he 
would observe that the correspondence had not produced 
any further agreement in doctrine ; that, so far as doctrines 
were concerned, all things appeared to remain in the same 
state as before. 

Ques. 3. Does witness remember of hearing the accused 
state, in a conversation held with witness last March in New 
Orleans, that in the opinion of the accused the doctrines em- 
braced by those denominated Calvinistic at the present day 
are not essentially different from those avowed and taught in 
the writings of Arminius ? 

Am. He does ; and at the same time the accused remark- 
ed that any Arminian could, with a pure and undefiled con- 
science, subscribe the Confession of Faith. 

Ques. 4. Does witness remember the sentiments which he 
has heard the accused, either publicly or privately, avow con- 
cerning the decrees of God ? 

Am. Witness has heard the accused speak on that subject, 
but his recollection is imperfect. He heard the remarks made 
at the close of a sermon at Port Gibson, but he is not able to 
state the particulars of those remarks. Witness well recollects 
the impression which was left on his mind. What the accus- 
ed stated at that time appeared to be the truth, but not the 
whole truth. The view he presented was partial, and not 
complete. 

Ques. 5. Does witness remember conversing with the ac- 
cused at Port Gibson, in October 1831, on certain words in 
a letter addressed by the accused to the Rev. George Potts 
concerning God's foreordination of whatever comes to pass ? 

Am. Witness recollects that he had a conversation with 
the accused at Port Gibson on that subject, and that the ac- 



336 



cused gave to witness explanations of what he intended by 
the remarks in the letter above alluded to. So far as witness 
is able to recollect, the accused proceeded upon the supposi- 
tion that Calvinists entertained views which, in the opinion of 
witness, fell little short of Fatalism ; and that in the remarks 
which he had made in the letter upon that subject, he went 
upon the supposition that Mr. Potts, witness, and others, held 
such views, that he did not intend to ridicule them but to shew 
their absurdity. Witness expressed his surprise and astonish- 
ment that the accused should ever have supposed that Cal- 
vinists entertained the views which he attributes to them. 
He replied, that this was the kind of Calvinism which he op- 
posed. 

Ques. 6. Can witness say, that according to the rules of 
business adopted by the Presbytery, the reading of any por- 
tion of a written document in presence of the Presbytery by 
a chairman of a Committee, and as constituting a report which 
said Committee has proposed to offer and the Presbytery has 
agreed to hear, does not virtually and formally place said docu- 
ment before the Presbytery ? 

Ans. In reply to this question, witness would say that he 
does not consider a report as formally before the Presbytery 
until a motion is made for its acceptance or adoption. The 
reading of a part, or even the whole, of a report, he considers 
as merely a preliminary to the question whether the Presby- 
tery shall or shall not proceed to the consideration of the re- 
port ; nor until they do proceed to the consideration of the 
report, is it fairly and formally before the Presbytery. Until 
that time, the report is at the disposal of the Committee and 
not of the Presbytery ; although the Committee is subject to 
the order and control of the Presbytery. 

Ques. 7. Does not witness recollect features of the pro- 
ceedings of the Presbytery at Port Gibson respecting the ac- 
cused which were calculated to lead the accused to suppose 
that all the communications made to the Committee of con- 
ference were made to the Presbytery ? 

Jlns. I do not recollect any feature in the proceedings there 
calculated to lead the accused to such a conclusion. 



337 



Ques. 8. Will witness state whether it was the duty of the 
Committee of conference to disclose to the Presbytery every 
thing essentially wrong in the communications made to them 
by the accused to the Presbytery ? and, by parity of reason, 
was it not their duty to unfold to the Presbytery every thing 
essentially right in such communications ? 

Ans. They were appointed to confer with the accused on 
the subject of doctrines, and it was doubtless their duty to re- 
port faithfully to the Presbytery the whole result of their con- 
ference ; and of course their report ought to contain a true 
statement of whatever they discovered, whether it was essen-* 
tially right or wrong. 

Ques. 9. Has not the accused often assured witness that he 
has been as sincere as it was possible for him to be in all his 
solemn exhibitions of truth before the Presbytery and the 
members of the Presbytery privately ? 

Ans. He has frequently made such declarations. 

Ques. 10. Does witness know whether the records of the 
Mississippi Presbytery, respecting the trial of the accused, 
were shewn to any members of the synod of Mississippi and 
South Alabama at its late session ? 

Ans. He was not there, and does not know. 

Ques. 11. by moderator. Have you any further testimony 
to offer, either for or against the accused, in relation to these 
charges ? 

Jins. I have nothing further. 

The above testimony was read to the witness in presence 
of the parties, and approved, and the witness discharged. 

Resolved to adjourn, and meet at Mr. William Bisland's at 
half past 6 o'clock, P. M. Concluded with prayer. 

BENJ. CHASE, Clerk. 

Tuesday, Dec. 18, 1832, half past 6, P. M. 

The Presbytery met at Mr. Bisland's according to adjourn- 
ment. Opened with prayer. 

The accused having informed the Presbytery he had no 
more witnesses present to introduce, the Committee of pro- 



338 



seculion proposed that we proceed to issue the case ; and, after 
some discussion, the further consideration of it was postponed 
till to-morrow. 

Resolved to adjourn, to meet in the school-house to-mor- 
row morning at 9 o'clock. Concluded with prayer. 

Wednesday, Dec. IQth, 9 o'clock, P. M. 

Met according to adjournment. Opened with prayer. 

The following resolution was unanimously adopted : viz. 

Resolved, that as we have learned from the accused that 
he has no more witnesses present to examine, the Presbytery 
do now proceed to hear the parties and issue the case. 

The Presbytery being informed that an understanding had 
taken place between the accused and the Committee of pro- 
secution that the accused should make a few remarks, to 
which the Committee would not reply unless the accused 
should continue to too great a length and enter into matter 
which in the opinion of the Committee required a reply, and 
that the case should then be submitted to the Presbytery for 
decision ; the accused was accordingly heard in his de- 
fence till about one o'clock^ when, at the suggestion of the ac- 
cused, 

Resolved to have a recess until half past one o'clock, 
P. M. 

After recess, resumed business. The accused resumed, and 
continued his remarks until near night, when he requested 
permission to postpone making further observations until to- 
morrow. 

Resolved that we proceed to the transaction of ordinary 
business. 

Resolved to adjourn, to meet at Mr. Bisland's at 6 o'clock, 
P. M. Concluded with prayer. 

6 o'clock, P. M. 
Met according to adjournment. Opened with prayer. 
Resolved that we pass from a common to a judicial capa- 
city. 

The moderator announced that we were about to pass to 
the business assigned for trial, and enjoined upon members 



339 



to regard their high character as judges of a court of Jesus 
Christ. 

The Presbytery learning that some misunderstanding exist- 
ed between the parties as to the introduction of new testi- 
mony, resolved to reconsider the motion to proceed to hear 
the parties and issue the case of Mr. Clapp. 

After some discussion, the accused requested that the fur- 
ther consideration of his case might be postponed until to-mor- 
row morning. Whereupon, resolved to adjourn to meet in 
the school-house to-morrow morning at 8 o'clock. Conclud- 
ed with prayer. 

Thursday, Dec. 20th, 1832, 8 o'clock, A. M. 
The Presbytery met according to adjournment. Opened 
with prayer. 

The unfinished business of last session was called up, viz. 
the following resolution passed at the opening of the business 
yesterday. — Resolved, that as we have learned from the ac- 
cused that he has no more witnesses present to examine, the 
Presbytery do now proceed to hear the parties and issue the 
case. 

The moderator inquired of the accused, whether he were 
prepared for trial ? to w 7 hich the accused replied by request- 
ing inforrriation as to the introduction of new testimony, and 
was referred to the rules of the Book of Discipline for instruc- 
tion. The accused then announced to the moderator that he 
was ready to proceed to issue the case. 

Whereupon, unanimously 

Resolved, that the above resolution be so amended as to read 
thus : — " Whereas the accused has notified the Presbytery 
" that he is ready to proceed to the issue of the case ; therefore 
" Resolved, that we do now proceed to hear the parties and 
" issue the case." 

The Committee of prosecution accordingly opened the 
case, and proceeded to comment upon the testimony respect- 
ing the first charge ; after which 

Resolved, that we pass from a judicial to a common capa- 
city. 

15 



340 



Resolved to have a recess until half past one o'clock, P. M. 
After recess, resumed business. 

Resolved, that we pass to a judicial capacity. Whereupon 
the moderator announced from the chair that the Presbytery- 
was about to proceed to the business assigned for trial, and 
solemnly enjoined upon the members to regard their high 
character as judges of a court of Jesus Christ. 

The Committee of prosecution proceeded in their com- 
ments upon the testimony respecting the second charge, and 
occupied the floor until a quarter past 4, P. M. ; when the 
accused commenced his defence, and continued until inter- 
rupted by a motion for adjournment. 

Adjourned to meet at Mr. Bisland's at a quarter past 6 
o'clock, P. M. Concluded with prayer. 

Quarter past 6, P. M. 

Met according to adjournment. Opened with prayer. 

The accused resumed, and continued his defence until 9 
o'clock ; when, on motion, 

Resolved to adjourn, and meet to-morrow morning in the 
school-house at half past 8 o'clock. Concluded with prayer. 

Friday, December 21st, \ past 8 o'clock, A. M. 
Met according to adjournment ; opened with prayer. Re- 
sumed unfinished business ; and the accused continued to 
address the Presbytery in his defence until a quarter past 12, 
meridian. 

Resolved, to have a recess for half an hour. 

After recess, resumed business ; and the accused continued 
and concluded his defence. A few remarks were made by 
the Committee of prosecution, and some further explanations 
given by the accused, when the parties submitted the case for 
decision and retired from the house. 

A season was set apart for special prayer ; after which the 
Presbytery proceeded to the solemn consideration of the case 
before them. 

The Presbytery were occupied in deliberating upon the 
case of the accused, until arrested by a resolution to adjourn 



341 



and meet at Mr. Bisland's at half past six o'clock, P. M. 
Concluded with prayer. 

Half past 6 o'clock, P. M. 

Met according to adjournment, Opened with prayer. The 
evening was occupied in deliberations upon the case before 
us until after 10 o'clock, when, 

Adjourned to meet at the school-house to-morrow morning 
at half past 8 o'clock. Concluded with prayer. 

Saturday, December 22d, 1832, \ past 8 o'clock, A. M. 

Met according to adjournment ; opened with prayer ; took 
up unfinished business by proceeding to the further conside- 
ration of the case of Mr. Clapp. 

After receiving a full expression of the views of the mem- 
bers of the Presbytery, the vote was taken upon each of the 
specifications under the two charges preferred against the 
Rev. Theodore Clapp ; whereupon it was found that all the 
specifications, with two exceptions, viz. the 5th specification 
under the 1st charge, and the 4th specification under the 2d 
charge, were sustained. 

Resolved, that in view of the evidence in support of these 
charges, even with all the qualifying circumstances that have 
been alleged in defence of the accused, it is the solemn con- 
viction of this Presbytery that the Rev. Theodore Clapp 
should be, and he hereby is, suspended from the office of the 
Gospel ministry, until satisfactory reasons be offered for his 
restoration. 

Resolved, that we express hereby our earnest hope and 
prayer, that he may be brought to a sense of his guilt and to 
due acknowledgment, and thus be ultimately restored to the 
confidence of the church and the possession of a place in its 
ministry. 

Resolved, that the Rev. Messrs. Vancourt and Blair be a 
Committee to report a minute to the Presbytery, embodying 
the reasons of the Presbytery for the above decision. 

Resolved, that we have an intermediate meeting of the 
Presbytery at Natchez, on the second Wednesday of January 



342 



next at eleven o'clock, A. M., at which time the Committee 
appointed by the above resolution shall present their report. 

Resolved, that sixty days from the intermediate meeting in 
January next be allowed Mr. Clapp, within which time he 
may give notice in form of his intention to appeal from the 
above decision. 

Resolved, that a copy of the above resolution, signed by 
the moderator and clerk, be immediately placed in the hands 
of Mr. Clapp. 

This resolution being complied with, 

Resolved, that in view of the solemn decision to which we 
have just come, we have a season of special prayer for the 
blessings of God, whose presence we trust has been realized 
during the examination and in the decision of the distressing 
case which has so long occupied our attention. 

After a season of special prayer, resumed business, and 
passed from a judicial capacity to the transaction of ordinary 
business. 

The trial being over, the Rev. James Smylie, chairman of 
the Committee of prosecution, returned to the house and re- 
sumed his seat. 

Adjourned, to meet at Natchez the second Wednesday in 
January next at 1 1 o'clock, P. M. Concluded with prayer 
and the Apostolic benediction. 

JOHN H. VANCOURT, Moderator. 
BENJAMIN CHASE, Clerk. 

Natchez, January 1833. 
The Presbytery met according to adjournment, and opened 
with prayer by the moderator. Minutes of the last sitting 
were read. 

On calling for letters, petitions, &c. a letter was received 
from the Rev. Alexander Newton, assigning reasons for not 
obeying the citation to appear and give testimony in the case 
©f the Rev. Theodore Clapp at our last stated meeting at 
Pine Ridge, which were considered satisfactory. 

The Committee appointed to prepare a minute embodying 
the reasons of the Presbytery for their decision in the case of 
the Rev. Theodore Clapp, presented a report, which was ac- 
cepted, and, after amendment, adopted, and is as follows, viz. 



343 



The Presbytery of Mississippi, having, on the 22d day of 
December, 1832, suspended the Rev. Theodore Clapp from 
the ministry " until satisfactory reasons be offered for his re- 
storation," now proceed, in obedience to the rules of their go- 
vernment, to assign the reasons of the above decision. 

To give a more complete view of the subject, and to ren- 
der it evident that the Presbytery have not been neglectful 
of " the peace and purity" of the church, nor wanting in ten- 
derness, faithfulness, or justice to Mr. Clapp, it will be ne- 
cessary to make a brief review of the events which took place 
previously to the trial which has now resulted in his suspen- 
sion. 

In October, 1826, a communication, addressed to the mode- 
rator, was laid before the Presbytery ; it was signed by a 
member of the church at New Orleans, and preferred charges 
against Mr. Clapp in relation to doctrine and deportment. 
But, inasmuch as the discipline of the church enjoins great 
caution in receiving accusations from any one who is himself 
under process, and as it appeared from the document which 
the member of the church forwarded, that he was himself 
then under process for neglect of duty, it was deemed expe- 
dient by the Presbytery not to receive these charges immedi- 
ately, but to appoint a Committee, whose duty it should be to 
investigate the business more particularly, and report the re- 
sult at the next meeting. 

This Committee visited New Orleans in the following De- 
cember, when, after a careful investigation, they ascertained 
that the facts upon which the charge in relation to deport- 
ment was founded, were either unimportant or misunderstood, 
and that the charge in relation to doctrine seemed to be ex- 
aggerated by misconception and incorrect report. But after 
every reasonable deduction on that account, it appeared evi- 
dent that Mr. Clapp had expressed himself upon some occa- 
sions in a manner which they could not approve ; the Com- 
mittee accordingly intimated their dissatisfaction, and re- 
quested explanations. 

In the letter by which he replied, he stated that the dis- 
course which was supposed to contain the most of his objec- 



344 



tionable remarks, was originally delivered extemporaneously ; 
and he attributed any language calculated to make a wrong 
impression to " the inadvertence, hurry, and want of time for 
reflection," to which extemporaneous speakers are subjected ; 
and that he had preached the sermon a second time as deli- 
vered at first, that he might not do injustice to those who had 
animadverted on it, so that if he had been justly censured, it 
might thus appear to the Committee. And he concluded, by 
declaring to the Committee that he could cordially subscribe 
to the article of the Confession of Faith, which it was sup- 
posed he had impugned. 

The explanations and declarations contained in this letter, 
and the conversations which were held by Mr. Clapp with 
the Committee on the doctrines of divine sovereignty and 
human depravity, and other subjects, induced them to make 
a favourable report to the Presbytery. 

From the evidence presented in this report, the Presbytery 
(whilst they were constrained to condemn his phraseology as 
4i incautious and incorrect") declared that they did not per- 
ceive any absolute and essential difference between his views 
in relation to the doctrine of divine foreknowledge and those 
of the Confession of Faith ; and as to the charge affecting 
his deportment, they expressed themselves satisfied of his in- 
nocence. 

It was not till the latter part of 1829 and the beginning of 
1830, that rumours of his departure from the system of truth, 
which he solemnly received when he entered our church, be- 
came very frequent and loud. At length a member of the 
Presbytery with whom he had been in habits of correspond- 
ence, convinced that Mr. Clapp was acting disingenuously in 
concealing the changes which appeared to have taken place 
in his sentiments, informed him that it was his opinion, and 
the opinion of others of the Presbytery, that if he had really 
changed his doctrinal sentiments, it would be best for him to 
retire quietly from the church and not disturb its peace. On 
the 7th of April, 1830, a letter was received by the Presby- 
tery from Mr. Clapp, dated on the 5th of the preceding month, 
in which he declared that " he disbelieved and felt it his duty 



345 



to preach against" each and all of the doctrines therein specie 
fied, and which he supposed that his brethren in the ministry 
in this section of the country regarded as the generally ac- 
knowledged and distinguishing tenets of the Presbyterian 
church, and requested a dismission to join a Congregational 
association in Massachusetts. 

For the Presbytery to dismiss him in the usual and ne- 
cessary form, (for dismission includes a recommendation of 
the individual dismissed as " in good and regular standing,'') 
to join another ecclesiastical body with the same doctrinal 
sentiments with themselves, and who were at this very time in 
fraternal correspondence with them, their correspondence 
being based upon an avowed unity of doctrinal sentiments,— 
was impossible, inasmuch as it involved both a violation of 
truth and a breach of good faith : for he had assigned as the 
reason for this very request, that his doctrinal sentiments 
were different from those of the Presbytery, and of course 
to be considered different from those of the congregational 
association which he proposed to join. 

The Presbytery accordingly saw but one course which they 
could with propriety pursue. Without bringing him to trial 
or divesting him of the ministerial office, (for he was not then 
considered unsound in essential doctrines,) they declared him 
withdrawn from the Presbyterian church, some of the doc- 
trines of which he had renounced, and left him at liberty to 
remain independent, or connect himself with any ecclesiastical 
body he could find, whose doctrinal views accorded with his 
own. 

They supposed that this decision would prove more satisfac- 
tory to Mr. Clapp, than subjecting him to a regular trial and 
formally excluding him from the ministry, which otherwise 
they were bound to do. From this decision he did not appeal, 
as he had a right to do ; and it was not until Presbytery met 
in New Orleans, in January 1831, to settle the difficulties in 
the church of that place, that they were officially assured of 
his dissatisfaction with their decision. Against the arrange- 
ment of those difficulties, a minority of the session entered a 
complaint, which was by mutual consent referred to the Gene- 



346 



ml Assembly, and thus the whole matter was brought before 
them for adjudication. On the 1st of June, that body, then 
met in Philadelphia, decided that Mr. Clapp " ought still to be 
regarded as a member of the Mississippi Presbytery, and 
amenable to them for all errors in doctrine and deportment :" 
and " that they have sufficient reasons to try him upon the 
charge of errors in doctrine." 

In the succeeding October, the Presbytery met at Port Gib- 
son, Mississippi, and Mr. Clapp appeared. The Presbytery 
passed a resolution, recognizing him as a member, in obe- 
dience to the decision of the late Assembly, and proceeded to 
adopt measures preparatory to his trial, as enjoined by the As- 
sembly,-— upon the ground of errors in doctrine, avowed in 
his letter of March 5, 1830. But he now addressed a letter 
to Presbytery, (then in session,) explanatory, as he said, of his 
letter of March 5, 1830, in which he stated that he was not 
conscious that there had been " any material change in his 
views" of the specified doctrines since he had written the 
letter of March 5 — excepting in one point, which he then " dis- 
believed" but now " believed." This letter was then placed 
in the hands of a Committee ; who also held a conference with 
him, which resulted in his subscription, without explanations, 
to statements of doctrine in the form of questions which em- 
braced the points then in doubt.* 

* Do you believe that there are three persons in the Godhead — that Jesus 
Christ is eternally and essentially God, equal with the Father in wisdom, 
power and glory ? I do— T. Clapp. 

Do you believe in the distinct personality of the Holy Spirit — his equality 
with the Father in wisdom, power and glory — the necessity of his influence 
in the regeneration of human hearts, and in the production of faith and re- 
pentance, and every thing morally good in man 1 I do — T. Clapp. 

Do you believe that Unitarians, or persons holding the negative of the 
above questions, however sincere their professions, or however correct their 
moral deportment, should not be admitted to communion at the Lord's table 
by a minister of the Presbyterian church ? I do — T. Clapp. 

Do you believe that the punishment of the finally impenitent will be with- 
out end 1 I do— T. Clapp. 

Do you believe that God did, from all eternity, predestine a certain definite 
number of the human race to eternal life — such decree not being founded up- 
on any foresight of their faith and good works, but upon His own mere good 
pleasure— securing for them, however, that faith and holiness necessary to 
prepare them for the presence of God 1 I do — T. Clapp* 



347 



But as there were loud rumours that the doctrines which he 
usually preached, differed from those to which he had just sub- 
scribed, and as there were some discrepancies apparent be- 
tween the two letters, which were not yet reconciled, his sub- 
scription to sound doctrine did not settle the difficulties, so 
long as he not only disavowed any recantation of errors, but 
actually declared that he was not conscious of there having 
been any material change in his doctrinal views, except on 
one point, since he wrote the former of the two letters. Be- 
sides which, statements were now abroad affecting his moral 
and Christian character. For these reasons Presbytery judg- 
ed further investigation necessary. A committee was appoint- 
ed for this purpose, and directed to report at the next meeting 
of Presbytery. 

At this meeting, which took place in January, 1832, the Com- 
mittee reported that they had partially proceeded in the duty 
assigned them, and had held some correspondence with Mr. 
Clapp, which they laid before Presbytery, and begged to be 
permitted to continue their investigations until the next stated 
meeting. As it appeared from their correspondence that 
there was an evident discrepancy between Mr. Clapp's views, 
as therein expressed, and the views given to Presbytery at 
Port Gibson, the Committee of investigation was continued. 

At the next stated meeting, which was held at Carmel, 
Mississippi, in April 1832, this Committee reported that, not 
only Mr. Clapp's soundness in doctrine, but also his moral and 
Christian character were seriously brought into question : — 
that as allegations to this amount were frequent, strong, and 
increasing, they would recommend, as a matter of justice 
to Mr. Clapp and to the church, the appointment of a Com- 
mittee of prosecution (according to the book of Discipline), 

Although some difficulty exists in your mind in regard to the final perseve- 
rance of every one who has been regenerated by the spirit of God, do you, 
upon the whole, believe as held by our church ? I do — T. Clapp. 

Do you believe that Creeds and Confessions of Faith are useful and neces- 
sary as definite expressions of what, in our view, the scriptures contain ? 

I do— T. Clapp. 

Do you believe in the efficacy of intercessory prayer, as usually held by 
the Presbyterian church ? I do — T. Clapp. 

46 



348 



who should conduct charges against him, both on doctrine and 
deportment, to an issue without further delay. Such a Com- 
mittee was appointed, who presented charges in regular form 
before the adjournment of Presbytery ; and the Presbytery 
cited him to appear before them at an adjourned meeting to 
commence on the 3d of May following, in New Orleans, and 
transmitted to him a copy of the charges, and a list of wit- 
nesses by which they would be substantiated. 

On the day appointed, they commenced their sessions in 
New Orleans, and Mr. Clapp appeared. The following charges 
and specifications were read to him by the Moderator, viz.— 

CHARGE I. 

Rev. Theodore Clapp is charged with having avowed and 
taught doctrines inconsistent with the Confession of Faith and 
Catechisms of the Presbyterian church, after having solemnly 
adopted these standards. 

Specification 1. Avowing and teaching doctrines incon- 
sistent with the doctrine of original sin as taught in the Con- 
fession of Faith and Catechisms of our church. 

Specif. 2. Denying the doctrine of the Holy Trinity as 
taught in the Confession of Faith and Catechisms. 

Specif. 3. Avowing and teaching doctrines inconsistent 
with the decrees of God as taught in the Confession of Faith 
and Catechisms. 

Specif. 4. Denying that a belief in the divinity of Christ is 
essential to salvation. 

Specif. 5. Denying the Christian Sabbath to be perpetu- 
ally binding ; and speaking of it in such a way as to leave the 
impression that he believed it optional with mankind whether 
they kept it holy or not. 

Specif. 6. Denying the efficacy of intercessory prayer. 

The following is a list of the witnesses named under this 
charge, viz : Hon. Samuel H. Harper, Alfred Hennen Esq., 
J. A. Maybin Esq., Dr. John R. Moore, Dr. T. O. Meux, Dr. 
John Rollins, Rev. S. H. Hazard, Rev. Gordon Winslow, 
Messrs. Robert H. M'Nair, W. W. Caldwell, Hugh Farrie 



349 



Sen., Eben. Lane, L. J. Robbins, Truman Parmele, Thos. 
Smith, William Clark, Samuel Slater, J. S. Walton, Mrs. Mar- 
garet M'Nair, Mrs. D. A. Hearsey, Mrs. Stella Sprigg, Mrs. 
Judge Harper, Mrs. Ann Davidson, Mr. F. R. Southmayd, 
Rev. Messrs. Chase, Donan, and John B. Warren :— also writ- 
ten documents. 

CHARGE II. 

Rev. Theodore Clapp is charged with having been guilty of 
immoral and unchristian conduct 

Specification 1. Slanderous and unchristian statements in 
relation to sundry professors of religion in New Orleans. 

Specif. 2. Slanderous .statements in relation to sundry bre- 
thren in the ministry. 

Specif. 3. Falsehood in denying the slanderous statements 
he made in relation to Mr. Farrie, and Madams Hearsey and 
Hill, in his letter to Rev. George Potts, and in denying his hav- 
ing used Mrs. Hill's name at all. 

Specif. 4. Falsehood in stating, after his return from Pres- 
bytery at Port Gibson in Oct. 1831, that the differences be- 
tween him and the Mississippi Presbytery were entirely set- 
tled. 

Specif. 5. Falsehood in reporting, that it was with expla- 
nations that he signed the questions, a copy of which is con- 
tained in the printed minutes, p. 60-61. 

Specif. 6. Falsehood in declaring that the statements of the 
Pastoral letter sent by Presbytery to the 1st Presbyterian 
Church in New r Orleans were false in detail and in toto. 

To support the above specifications, the following witness- 
es, in addition to those above mentioned, were named : Mrs. 
C. Robbins, Mr. N. Goodale, Rev. Wm. Montgomery, and 
Mr. Wm. G. Hewes. 

_ To these charges and specifications, Mr. Clapp put in the 
plea of not guilty. 

The Presbytery continued their sessions until the 17th of 
May, during which time twenty-two witnesses were examin- 
ed, and several written documents were introduced and re- 
corded as testimony. Mr. Clapp then requested the postpone- 



350 



ment of his trial, on account of severe indisposition and the 
absence of important witnesses. This request was immediate- 
ly granted, and the Presbytery adjourned to meet on the last 
Wednesday in July, at Friendship Church, East Feliciana, La. 
for the conclusion of the trial. Of all which Mr. Clapp was 
duly notified. 

At the time and place appointed, the Presbytery met, but 
Mr. Clapp did not appear. A letter, purporting to be from 
Mr. Clapp, was received, however, containing the information 
that he was on his way to Kentucky, in good health, accom- 
panied by his wife and family ; and assigning, as a reason for 
his departure at that juncture, that " his wife was exceedingly 
enervated by the effect of the heat and assiduous attentions to 
her children," and requesting a further postponement of his 
trial until some day posterior to the middle of November. 
As a long delay was thus occasioned by himself, and as the 
charges against- him were of so serious a nature, Presbytery 
deemed it necessary to suspend him from the exercise of his 
office until the case should be regularly issued. They also 
postponed their stated meeting until the 2d Wednesday in 
December, and thus afforded him ample time to return and 
prepare for trial. 

On the 12th of December, Presbytery met at Pine Ridge 
Church, Adams co. Mississippi, when Mr. Clapp appear- 
ed. Ten days were occupied principally in attending to his 
case, and eight witnesses, introduced by him, were examin- 
ed, and he was heard in his own defence to the full extent 
which he desired. 

The Presbytery, after spending much time in fervent 
prayer, and in the careful and solemn consideration of the tes- 
timony, decided the case. 

In accordance with the rules of our government, the rea- 
sons for this decision must now be assigned. It will be per- 
ceived that there were two general charges, the first of which 
related to doctrine, the second to deportment. 

He stood charged ; First, with having avowed and taught 
doctrines inconsistent with the Confession of Faith and Cate- 



351 



ehisms of the Presbyterian church, after having solemnly 
adopted these standards. 

He stood charged ; Second, with having been guilty of im- 
moral and unchristian conduct. 

Jt is to be observed, that but one of the witnesses cited was 
challenged by the accused, and that he finally waived his ob- 
jection to his introduction. 

It is also to be observed, that the first charge relates to what 
the accused had avowed and taught, not to what he now pro- 
fesses to believe. For it was a well known fact, that he had 
subscribed and continued to subscribe to sound doctrine ; and 
it was admitted by witnesses that he sometimes avowed and 
taught sound doctrine, but proved that at other times he avow- 
ed and taught doctrines which were unsound. 

1. Under the first specification of the first charge, he stood 
charged with having avowed and taught doctrines inconsistent 
with the doctrine of original sin as taught in the standards of 
our church. 

It appeared in evidence that he denied and derided the doc- 
trine of imputation : (admitting however, that mankind were 
in some way " injuriously affected by the apostacy of Adam :) 
that he had taught that mankind were not depraved by nature : 
that in moral nature, children were " as pure as a sheet of 
white paper" — " as pure as the angels in heaven," — that when 
they obtain light and knowledge, and actually commit sin, this 
first sin which they commit was the original sin in which he 
believed, — and that if they lived without committing this sin 
for twenty years, they would be as pure as the angels in hea- 
ven up to that time. 

Much testimony to this effect was adduced, from which it 
appeared that he had denied this Scripture doctrine, so impor- 
tant in its connexions and dependancies upon other vital truths 
of the Bible. This is not the place to establish the truth or 
vindicate the importance of the doctrine referred to. We 
are now concerned with the fact of Mr. Clapp's denial of two 
doctrines, deemed essential by the church to which he belong- 
ed : — the inherent depravity of human nature, and such a con- 
nexion between Adam, as a fcederal representative, as did in- 



352 



volve his posterity in the guilt of his transgression : that is, 
rendered them liable to the penal consequences of sin. Even 
infant descendants of Adam suffer and die ; and the doctrine 
of the Presbyterian church, and of all the evangelical deno- 
minations of Christians, is, that the exposure of infants to 
these evils, and their possession of a tainted moral nature, pro- 
ducing, as soon as it is developed, evil fruit, is the result of the 
representative or foederal connexion between the parent of 
mankind and his posterity. 

It has been charged upon us that we maintain the doctrine 
of infant damnation. Nothing but ignorance and prejudice 
can excuse this charge. For although Scripture is not express 
upon this particular point, the general opinion is in favour of 
the salvation of all who have not committed actual sin ; but 
that even their salvation is nevertheless secured only by the 
application of the atoning blood and regenerating grace of the 
Lord Jesus Christ to their moral nature. 

It was evident from the various testimony, that the accused 
had avowed and taught doctrines on this subject inconsistent 
with the standards which he had adopted ; and this specifica- 
tion was unanimously sustained. 

2. Under the second specification, he stood charged with 
denying the doctrine of the Holy Trinity as taught in the 
Confession of Faith and Catechisms. 

It appeared in evidence that his exhibitions of this doctrine 
had led many to believe that he denied it. It appeared in 
evidence that he denounced a trinity of persons in the God- 
head as Tritheism : that he maintained only a trinity of facts : 
that it is a fact that there is a Creator, a fact that there is a 
Redeemer, a fact that there is a Sanctifier — that these are 
modifications of one God — that there are no personal proper- 
ties in the Godhead. This is the long exploded doctrine of 
Sabellius. His denial of being a Sabellian, does by no means 
change the nature of his doctrine. 

It appeared also in evidence, that Mr. Clapp had privately 
declared " that he was not a Trinitarian but a Duarian." 
This latter term can only mean that he believed in the divinty 
of the Father and of the Son, and not of the Holy Spirit. 



353 



Even as to the divinity of the Son, it appeared in the evidence 
of one of his own witnesses, a minister of our church, that 
" although he never heard Mr. Clapp deny the fact of his di- 
vinity, he had heard him express himself in such a way as to 
excite in his mind the fear that he did not attach so much im- 
portance to it as he ought." It appeared also in evidence, that 
he had declared, that though he believed in the divinity of 
Christ, there were some passages against the doctrine which 
had never been answered ; and that we should go upon the 
presumption that those who deny the doctrine may be right, 
and we wrong. 

This is but a part of the evidence bearing upon this point. 
— Let it be remembered that the word Person has been in use 
for ages, to denote a certain distinction in the divine nature 
not fully revealed, and that it is not employed in the sense of 
an independent and distinct being. Dr. Dwight observes, that 
" this term has been chosen by Trinitarians, as answering the 
purpose so far as it can be answered by human language." 
Ser. 39. And Professor Stuart says, " I see no very urgent 
reason why the use of the word person to denote a distinc- 
tion in the Godhead should be rejected. It is exceedingly 
difficult to exchange it for a better one, or one that will so 
well correspond with the representations of the Bible in re- 
gard to such a distinction. Certainly no term can be substi- 
tuted for it which will not in like manner be obnoxious to 
more or less objections." On the Hebrews, Excur. 1, p. 322. 
The belief that there are three Gods, is Tritheism, not the be- 
lief that there is one God, who is Tri-personal. 

The evidence in support of this specification was full and 
explicit, and the specification was unanimously sustained. 

3. Under the third specification he stood charged with hav- 
ing avowed and taught doctrines inconsistent with the decrees 
of God as taught in the Confession of Faith. 

His real sentiments on this subject, and indeed on all the 
distinguishing doctrines of our system of faith, seem to be in- 
volved in much obscurity. The most obvious construction of 
his language, in the conclusion of his letter to the Committee, 
dated N. Orleans, Dec. 16. 1828, seems to afford sufficient 



354 



proof, so far as words can go, of his cordial reception of this 
doctrine as held by the Presbyterian church. His letter also 
to Presbytery, dated Port Gibson, October 14, 1831, seems to 
afford similar proof. The same may be said also of his re- 
ply to the fifth interrogation, addressed to him at the same 
place, as recorded in the printed minutes.* 

But, on the other hand, he enumerates certain doctrines in 
his letter of March 5, 1830, as the leading principles of Cal- 
vinism ; one of which, (if not more) it is true, is not believed 
generally, and perhaps not by any one : and several others 
are stated, not in the language of the advocates, but of the 
opponents of this system, in such a way as to render it almost 
certain that the real views of Calvinists on that subject would 
be misunderstood. He then declared that he disbelieved 
them all. It also appeared in evidence, that his public exhibi- 
tions of these doctrines are generally partial and ambiguous, 
and tending to cast odium to the Presbyterian church. He 
also conceded that he always had opposed, and did now op- 
pose, what he conceived to be the distinguishing doctrines of 
Calvinism, with the exception of the final perseverance of the 
saints. His declaration that his views had not undergone any 
material change, except on the above-mentioned point — his 
acknowledgment that he had subscribed to the Confession of 
Faith as an Arminian — his assertion that any Arminian could 
subscribe it with a pure and undefiled conscience — his ridicule 
of Calvinists under the contemptuous appellation of " Five 
pointers" — his sneering application of the Scripture term 
" elect" — his repeatedly ambiguous definitions and explana- 
tions — and finally, the very general impression made both on 
his friends and admirers, and his opponents, that he was an 
impugner of the views of the church to which he belonged ; 
— all these things, viewed in connection, constitute a course of 
conduct which seems unaccountable except on one supposi- 
tion. 

Can it be accounted for by supposing that he is unable to 
discover any difference between the Calvinistic and Arminian 



* See note on page 346. 



355 



systems of doctrine t This supposition is met on the very 
threshold by the notorious fact, that all distinguished theolo* 
gians and theological councils, from the days of Arminius to 
the present time, have uniformly maintained that there is a 
material difference and distinction between these two sys- 
tems, although they possess many things in common. If 
his mind be so constituted as to discover no difference, it can* 
not surely harmonize with the minds of all other men, who 
see and believe the difference to be palpable. A mind so 
constituted, must be productive of discord, and badly qualified 
for the investigation, discrimination, and inculcation of doc* 
trinal truth. 

Can the inconsistency of the accused be accounted for by 
the supposition that he is unacquainted with the doctrinal pe- 
culiarities of the two systems ? If this be the case, he has cer- 
tainly been guilty of inexcusable neglect, and has made a most 
unsuitable preparation for solemnly subscribing the doctrines 
of either system, and for the instruction of others in a know- 
ledge of Scriptural truth. 

Can it be accounted for by the supposition, that although 
he saw- and knew the difference, yet he thought it to be of 
little or no importance ? Even if this be so, he well knew 
that the church with which he had voluntarily associated him- 
self, considered the difference as of great importance, espe- 
cially to the peace and harmony of the church. If he impos- 
ed himself on them as a Calvinist when he knew that he was 
an Arminian, it seems evident that he must have deliberated 
an act of deceit and treachery which would absolutely dis- 
qualify him for the sacred office. His union with our church 
had been voluntary, and, upon a change in his views, his volun- 
tary egress would have been freely permitted and commend- 
ed. 

No doctrines of the Bible have been the subject of more 
misconception and misrepresentation than those which relate 
to the Divine purposes. This, it is true, has sometimes arisen 
from the inaccuracy and inability of some of their advocates, 
but more generally from the misconception, or perversion, or 
ignorance, of their opponents. The usual mode of attack is 

47 



356 



Hot upon the doctrine itself, but upon some supposed infe- 
rences, denied and disavowed by its advocates, but pertina- 
ciously charged as their real belief. It need scarcely be re- 
peated here, that we reject, as slanderous, such imputations 
as the following, viz. That we believe that some men were 
made to be damned, and that they will be damned do what 
they may, and others saved, do what they may ; that infants 
are lost ; that the great majority of human beings are repro- 
bated, and will finally perish. These and similar imputations 
we again pronounce to be slanders, and refer to our standard 
writers for correct exhibitions of our views of the Scripture 
doctrines of Divine Foreknowledge and Sovereignty — impor- 
tant parts of the system of grace revealed in the Gospel. 

Whatever may be the real sentiments of Mr. Clapp on this 
subject, it appeared in evidence that he has at many times 
avowed and taught doctrines inconsistent with the doctrine of 
the Decrees of God as taught in our standards ; and the third 
specification was therefore unanimously sustained. 

4. Under the fourth specification he stood charged with de- 
nying that a belief in the Divinity of Christ was essential to 
salvation. 

The positive testimony in support of this specification was 
full and precise. Besides which, the views of Mr. Clapp as 
expressed by himself to the Committee of Investigation, are 
corroborative of the truth of the charge. In his correspond- 
ence with that Committee, he declared himself in favour of 
admitting to church communion persons who deny the essen- 
tial Divinity of the Son of God, and of exchanging pulpits with 
a Unitarian minister as soon as with any other.* 

Not only the Presbyterian, but all Evangelical churches 
have uniformly held the Divinity of Christ to be an essential 
truth of the Gospel, the denial of which strikes at the vital 
parts of the plan of salvation. Between the candid believers 
and the rejecters of this cardinal article, there can be and 
ought to be, no compromise. If the first be right, their oppo- 
nents are radically wrong. If the Son of God be a creature, 

* See Note, p. 346-— the third question. 



357 



then are those who worship him guilty of idolatry ; but if he 
be essentially Divine, then are those who refuse to worship 
him guilty of an impious robbing him of his glory. They 
may, and they should, meet as men, with feelings of benevo- 
lence ; but upon their own principles, they cannot meet as 
Christians, 

To diminish in any respect the cardinal importance and 
fundamental character of this doctrine, is, so far as it goes, an 
abandonment of the Gospel. This is done, with nearly if not 
entirely the same effect, when we deny that a belief of it is 
essential to salvation as when we directly deny the truth of 
the doctrine itself. The same plea that is urged in defence 
of Unitarianism in any of its various shades, (viz. sincerity,) 
may be urged in defence of open infidelity and atheism. 

These are the principles of church communion maintained 
by our church, a rejection of which is charged upon Mr. 
Clapp. It appears that he has long maintained these latitudi- 
narian views, and yet has insisted on his claims to be consi- 
dered a Presbyterian minister in good and regular standing. 
In this he has disturbed and persecuted the body of Christians 
with whom he voluntarily associated himself, and has caused 
extensive mischief. 

5. The fifth specification charges him with denying the 
Christian Sabbath to be perpetually binding, and speaking of 
it in such a way as to make the impression that he believed 
it optional with mankind whether they kept it holy or not. 

It appeared in evidence that he has been in the habit of 
teaching that the obligation to observe the Christian Sabbath 
was not founded on the fourth Commandment, but upon apos- 
tolic example, historical evidence, and utility ; that we should 
not teach others that the fourth Commandment was binding 
— that the obligation of the Christian Sabbath was not com- 
manded, but inferred. 

The doctrine of our church is, " That God, by a positive, 
moral, and perpetual command, binding all men in all ages, 
hath particularly appointed one day in seven for a Sabbath, to 
be kept holy unto him ; which, from the beginning of the 
world to the resurrection of Christ, was the last day of ths 



358 



week, and from the resurrection of Christ was changed to 
the first day of the week, which in Scripture is called the 
Lord's da}% and is to be continued to the end of the world as 
the Christian Sabbath." 

His doctrine does not accord with these standards, It is 
evident that his views are not only incorrect, but highly in- 
jurious, since the obligation is not presented in its true and full 
force. It has, however, appeared in evidence, that he has 
earnestly inculcated the utility and propriety of a religious 
observance of the Christian Sabbath, although even in this 
respect the testimony of witnesses shows some defects in his 
views of what a correct observance of the day implies. But, 
as it is uncertain whether the impression that he thought it 
optional with mankind whether they kept the Christian Sab- 
bath holy or not, has extended so far as seems to be implied 
in the terms of this specification, the specification was not 
sustained. 

6. The sixth specification charges him with denying the ef- 
ficacy of intercessory prayer. 

It appeared in evidence that he has taught that prayer for 
others would not be the means of procuring for them any 
blessings from God which he would not bestow without our 
prayers : that those who thought they procured revivals of 
religion by their prayers, made themselves more benevolent 
than God : that the only benefit to be derived from interces- 
sory prayer, was the effect produced upon ourselves in pro- 
moting our own piety. At the same time it appeared that 
he admitted that intercessory prayer was a duty, and practis- 
ed it himself. These inconsistencies it is not for us to ex- 
plain or defend. From the testimony, it appeared that the 
most injurious impressions had been made by his mode of 
teaching on this subject, and the specification was sustained. 

Thus closes the summary of the evidence under the first 
general charge. Five of the above specifications being fully 
sustained, the Presbytery decided unanimously that he is 
found guilty of " having avowed and taught doctrines incon- 
sistent with the Confession of Faith and Catechisms of th& 



Presbyterian church, after having solemnly adopted the 
same." 

II. The second general charge relates to deportment. He 
stood charged with having been guilty of " immoral and un- 
christian conduct." 

1. Under the first specification, he was charged with having 
made slanderous and unchristian statements in relation to 
sundry professors of religion in the city of New Orleans. 

In proceeding to the consideration of this specific charge, 
Presbytery feel an increasing sense of the responsibility of 
their situation. They must perform their duty, however pain- 
ful. On the one hand, duty requires them not to protect the 
guilty. If they were thus to protect one of their ministers 
or members, because they highly prized some of the qualities 
which he possessed, or for any other reason, they would sanc- 
tion sin and stain the purity of the church. But, on the other 
hand, duty requires them never to sacrifice the innocent. No 
matter how loudly and fiercely rumour may assail the charac- 
ter of their ministers or members, it cannot be allowed to 
produce any effect until there is a responsible accuser and 
credible testimony. With such views they proceeded to the 
consideration of this specific charge. 

But what is slander ? what statements may be considered 
slanderous ? 

It is perhaps well to notice, in the first place, the definition 
common in civil courts. Blackstone defines it, " a false tale 
or report maliciously uttered, tending to injure the reputation 
of another." Dr. Paley distinguishes between malicious and 
inconsiderate slander, and defines the former as, " the relating 
either truth or falsehood for the purpose of creating misery." 
This writer very properly considers " an injunction of secre- 
cy," when a slanderous communication is made, as " an aggra- 
vation, because it indicates more deliberation or design." 
The definition of slander given by Dr. Dwight, is both con- 
cise and comprehensive ; " it is that conduct which injurious- 
ly lessens or destroys another's reputation." These defini- 



360 



tions agree in all the important particulars necessary to con- 
stitute a rule to guide a decision in the present case. 

But what are the statements alluded to in this specification, 
and charged to be slanderous and unchristian ? 

It appeared in evidence that he had frequently spoken of 
professors of religion, either directly or by insinuation, in such 
a way as to assail their characters with respect to honesty 
and truth. It appeared also that in a letter written to a mem- 
ber of this judicatory, he used the following language, viz. 
" I have traced several reports as to my preaching, doctrine, 
and conduct, in which there is not a particle of truth, to some 
of the following persons, Messrs. Rollins, Ross, Farrie, and 
Caldwell ; and to Madams Hearsey and Hill. Now if you 
knew what I know, you would not credit what they say. If 
I am ever permitted to have a conversation w 7 ith you, I will, 
convince you that the opposition of the above-named persons 
is to be ascribed to iniquity, gross iniquity, which is not known 
publicly, and I hope never will be till the day of judgment. 
I cannot put what I allude to on paper, and I make this com- 
munication to you in confidence. I can convince you that 
from these persons I have suffered immensely, and in silence, 
because I do not wish to injure the cause of religion." And in 
the conclusion of the letter he remarks, " I beg of you the 
favour to carry this letter to Presbytery, and read it to them, 
(except the confidential part about Caldwell and others,) shew 
this to none." 

To judge more accurately in the case, it is necessary to 
take into view existing circumstances at the time when this 
letter was written. It will be remembered, that the Presbytery 
had dissolved Mr. Clapp's connexion with them in April 1830. 
But in June 1831, (more than a year afterwards,) the Gene- 
ral Assembly, before whom his case had been brought, had 
decided that he ought " still to be regarded as a member of 
the Mississippi Presbytery, amenable to them for all errors 
in doctrine and deportment ; and that they had sufficient 
reasons to try him for error in doctrine." The above-men- 
tioned letter is dated August 1831, that is, immediately poste- 
rior to the resolutions of the Assembly, and prior to the Oc° 



361 



tober meeting of Presbytery, when he knew that the sub* 
ject must come before them. Anxious to regain his standing? 
and to avoid the trial which the Assembly enjoined, he ad- 
dressed the above-mentioned letter to the Rev. George Potts, 
between whom and himself no confidential correspondence 
had existed for nearly two years, but, on the contrary, a cor- 
respondence forced by Mr. Clapp, and sufficiently indicative 
of an entire loss of confidence in him upon the part of his 
correspondent. 

In the introduction, he compliments Mr. Potts highly, and 
proceeds to explain somewhat at large his doctrinal views, 
and retracts his former doctrinal belief in one particular. He 
complains of the former decision of Presbytery in his case, 
and intimates that if the decision had been confirmed by 
the General Assembly, he had prepared a publication, which 
should be suppressed if Presbytery would do him justice. 
After touching upon the little reliance which is to be placed 
in reports, he uses the language already quoted as slanderous. 
It is evident from this language, that he considers the six in- 
dividuals named, as opposed to him, and feared that some of 
them had made, or might make, such representations as would 
operate against him, and perhaps seriously impede him in his 
efforts to regain his standing. If the credit of their testimo- 
ny could be destroyed, any. representations coming from them 
would of course be disregarded, fiut the attempt to destroy 
their credit was hazardous, unless it could be silently made ; 
and hence the injunction of secrecy. 

To effect the object in view, viz. the destruction of the cre- 
dibility of these persons, he declares that he " had traced 
several reports" respecting himself, in which there was not a 
particle of truth, to some of them. Had they originated, or 
only retailed these reports ? If they had retailed false reports, 
they were guilty of slander ; if they had originated and re- 
tailed them, they were guilty of falsehood and slander. The 
next sentence is more explicit — " if you knew what I know, 
you would not credit what they say." If they had been guilty 
of slander and falsehood, it was certainly a sufficient reason 
why they ought not to be believed. But, in addition to this, 



362 



he declares that he knew certain things which made these 
persons unworthy of credit. 

To place the question respecting their credibility beyond 
all manner of doubt, he goes farther — " Their opposition to 
me is to be ascribed to iniquity, gross iniquity, which is not 
known publicly, and I hope never will be till the day of 
judgment." He adds, " I cannot put what I allude to on 
paper." 

Although Mr. C. in his defence interpreted this language 
to mean, that the opposition of these persons to him originated 
in iniquity of which they were not themselves guilty, it is in 
evidence that he has also attempted to justify what would 
strike every mind as the fair and natural construction of this 
language. In the letter there is not a word which, even by 
remote allusion, implicates any other persons. No language 
could have been selected, better calculated, if believed, to ruin 
the reputation of the individuals named. The various and 
clashing interpretations given by him are altogether inadmis- 
sible, unless it can be believed that Mr. C. is unacquainted 
with the use of the English language. Besides which, it is in 
evidence that he did to one of the witnesses allege facts, 
which, if they were true, would seem to justify the language, 
even in its most natural construction. 

It has been observed, that the injunction of secrecy, under 
the circumstances of the case, is an aggravation of the offence. 
The blow was to be concealed. It was to benefit him at the 
expense of their characters ; or else, as Mr. C. could scarcely 
think he had a right to expect his injunction of secrecy would 
be regarded, (since confidential correspondence had long be- 
fore ceased between him and the person to whom he wrote, 
and since the very persons whose characters he assailed might 
hereafter be called forth as witnesses against him,) it might 
have been intended to furnish a fair occasion to accuse Mr. 
Potts of a betrayal of confidence, leaving it for the world to 
believe that he had been, up to this time, in uninterrupted 
habits of confidential correspondence with him. The injunc- 
tion of confidence in such a case, was like the bribery of a 
jury or the suborning of a witness. To impose these slan- 



363 



derous statements upon one member of the Presbytery — so 
that their pernicious effects might be spread among the other 
members, while yet the form and the origin of them remained 
concealed and the author protected by an injunction of secre- 
cy, and the characters of the persons concerned exposed to 
attack and ruin from an invisible foe, whom they could neither 
detect nor expose — was an attempt which excited surprise 
and a just indignation. It was at once evident to Mr. Potts 
that he could not be for a moment bound by such an injunc- 
tion, under such circumstances, without a participation of dis- 
honour and guilt. He gave Mr. Clapp immediate notice of 
the course he meant to pursue. " I will shew the letter, the 
whole letter, to the members of Presbytery : I say the whole 
letter, for I cannot consent to become the depository of con- 
fidential accusations against persons, some of whom I value as 
friends and Christians. The relative circumstances in which 
we are placed, seem, in my view, to preclude the propriety of 
confidential communications upon any points, or in relation to 
any persons, connected with the general subject. Since the 
matter came before Presbytery, I have not regarded our cor- 
respondence as confidential." 

Thus, by refusing to promote or conceal this attempt, he 
avoided a participation of the guilt. 

As he considered the persons mentioned in his letter as his 
opponents, and as he evidently intended to injure them in 
their reputation, malice must be inferred. In the judgment 
of Presbytery, therefore, he has been guilty of a most aggra- 
vated form of slander. This specification was unanimously 
sustained. 

% Under the second specification, he was charged with 
having made slanderous statements in relation to sundry bre- 
thren in the ministry. 

It appeared in evidence, that he had charged some of them 
with want of truth, and with upholding the Confession of 
Faith above the Word of God. It appeared in evidence that 
he had publicly called one of the members of this Pres- 
bytery (Rev. B. Chase) a liar ; that he had declared and 
insinuated that he knew enough of another member (Rev. 



364 



G. Potts) to ruin his character ; and that he had, on various 
occasions, employed the most opprobrious epithets to the 
proceedings of Presbytery, denominating them rascally, plot- 
ting, villanous, piratical, scoundrelly, &c. 

Adherence to the principles of justice and truth compelled 
Presbytery to take this evidence into consideration, and to 
decide upon it. Three of the brethren, whom these state- 
ments affected individually, requested to be excused from 
sitting in judgment and voting on this specification, and their 
request was granted. After consideration, the specification 
was fully sustained. 

Some general acknowledgments and concessions, as to the 
subject embraced in this specific charge, had been made be- 
fore the commencement of the trial, but in so vague and con- 
ditional a manner as not to be considered an acknowledg- 
ment of offence against the laws of Christian intercourse. 
Presbytery could not take such an acknowledgment into 
consideration, but were obliged to allow the specific charge 
to be instituted. 

But in his defence, when upon trial, full, formal, and uncon- 
ditional acknowledgment and desire of forgiveness were 
expressed. The Presbytery felt anxious that all offences 
committed against them, either personally or as a body, 
should be passed by ; and it was unanimously resolved that 
the consideration of this specific charge be dismissed from 
their minds, and that it have no weight in the final decision of 
the case. 

3. Under the third specification, he stood charged with 
falsehood in denying the slanderous statements he made in 
relation to Mr. Farrie and Madams Hearsey and Hill in his 
letter to Rev. George Potts, and denying his having used 
Mrs. Hill's name at all. 

It appeared in evidence, that he did deny that in the afore- 
said letter he had given the names of six individuals whose 
characters were such that their testimony against him ought 
not to be received ; that he did deny that the letter contain- 
ed a charge against the character of any professor of religion 
in N. Orleans. It appeared in evidence, that in a com- 



365 



munication addressed to Mr. Farrie himself, he gave the fol- 
lowing as " the language" of the aforesaid letter, viz. " That I 
believed I could convince Mr. Potts in a private interview, (I 
did not wish to do it on paper,) that the opposition to which 
you and some others belong originated in gross iniquity," 
Whereas he had a copy of the letter, at that time, in his own 
possession, in which the following is the language actually 
used, viz. " Now if you knew what I know, you would not 
credit what they say. If I am permitted to have a conver- 
sation with you, I will convince you that the opposition of the 
above-named persons is to be ascribed to iniquity, gross iniquity, 
which is not known publicly, and I hope never will be un- 
til the day of judgment. I cannot put what I allude to on 
paper." 

It also appeared in evidence, that he did deny that he 
meant to insinuate that the iniquity was to be imputed to the 
persons named, although it was also proved that he had 
stated or insinuated at other times, enough, if believed, to 
justify the palpable meaning of his language in regard to 
them. It appeared in evidence, that he did deny to one of 
the aforesaid persons that he had used her name in that letter 
disrespectfully ; at the same time solemnly appealing to God 
for the truth of what he had declared, saying, "Do you think 
me a very devil, to speak so disrespectfully of one who has 
been my best friend." 

It also appeared in evidence, that he denied having used 
Mrs. Hill's name at all. 

When the Presbytery view this amount of testimony in 
connection with the first specification of the second charge, 
they are driven to the painful conviction that one who has long 
partaken of the ministry with them has been guilty of de- 
liberate and intentional falsehood in repeated instances, and 
in one instance attended with a solemn appeal to God. 

As judges in a court of Jesus Christ, they dare neither con- 
ceal nor protect the guilty. Inexpressibly painful as is the 
duty, they must, upon the testimony of unchallenged wit- 
nesses, pronounce him guilty. This specification was unani- 
mously sustained. 



366 



4. Under the fourth specification, he stood charged with 
falsehood in stating, after his return from Presbytery in Port 
Gibson, in Oct. 1831, that the differences between him and 
the Mississippi Presbytery were entirely settled. 

It fully appeared in evidence, that he had made this state- 
ment at many times and on many occasions : and that this 
statement is false is evident, from the fact that Presbytery 
refused more than once to adopt the report of the Committee 
who had conferred with Mr. Clapp at that meeting : from 
the fact that doubts of Mr. Clapp's sincerity were openly ex- 
pressed in Presbytery : and from the fact that a Committee 
of investigation was judged necessary before his case could 
be settled. These facts were well known to him, for he was 
present when they occurred. 

But it is barely possible that he might have misinterpreted 
these facts. This possibility arises, from the ardent desire he 
certainly felt to consider the difficulties settled, — from the fa- 
vourable declaration of a few individuals in Presbytery,— 
from the Christian kindness and courtesy with which he was 
treated by all, — from his high confidence in his own skill and 
management, — and from finding to be groundless, certain 
fears, which it seems he had entertained, that Presbytery 
would refuse to acknowledge him to be a member of their 
body notwithstanding the decision of the General Assembly. 

It is therefore possible that these things might have induced 
him to think that the differences were settled in fact, although 
not in form.. And he might ignorantly have supposed that 
the difference between fact and form, in the present case, was 
unimportant. Upon the whole, although there are some 
things inconsistent with this understanding of the case, yet as 
a doubt exists in favour of the accused, it was decided that 
this specification be not sustained. 

5. Under the ffth specification he stood charged with false- 
hood, in reporting that it was with explanations that he sign- 
ed the questions, a copy of which is contained in printed mi- 
nutes, pages 60 and 61. 

That he did thus report, has fully appeared in evidence. It 



367 



has also fully appeared in evidence, that be gave no explana- 
tions whatever at the time he signed these questions. 

Is there any reason, then, which can induce the Presbytery 
to believe that he thought he was making a true report ? Was 
there any thing which he could possibly consider as explana- 
tions in signing these questions ? He could not possibly con- 
sider the letter which he had just laid before Presbytery to 
be explanations in signing the questions, for that letter was 
anterior to the appointment of the Committee which reported 
the paper containing the aforesaid questions, and therefore 
entirely distinct from those questions. Besides this, he was 
aware of the fact, that the appointment of said Committee, 
and the proposal by them of said questions to Mr. Clapp, was 
the result of the ambiguity and deficiency of the views con- 
tained in said letter. That letter, therefore, could not be con- 
sidered by any honest mind as furnishing ground for the as- 
sertion charged against the accused in the above specifica- 
tion. 

Again : could he with any candour allege that the conver- 
sations which he may have held with the Committee of con- 
ference were explanatory of a certain qualified sense in 
which he now asserts that he signed those questions 1 To 
this there is a palpable contradiction in the fact that no such 
conversations were reported, received, or acted upon by 
Presbytery. All this Mr. Clapp well knew, for he was pre- 
sent during the whole time, and heard the report read and 
accepted. If his conversations with the Committee were ex- 
planations of any qualified sense in which he answered the 
aforesaid interrogatories, and yet no notice were taken of this 
fact by the Committee in their report, it was his privilege 
as a member, and his duty as the person most deeply inte- 
rested, to have objected to it as an unfair and incorrect re- 
port, which might leave erroneous impressions of his views. 
But he made no objections nor explanations, and by his ac- 
quiescence sanctioned the report. 

Again : in asserting that he had signed the interrogatories 
in question with full explanations, could he have meant a pre- 
vious list of interrogatories, which the Committee of confe- 



368 

rence had before brought in, in order to report them to Pres- 
bytery, but the reading of which was arrested because they 
were presented in an informal manner, and incapable of the 
action of Presbytery upon them ? The answers to this first 
series of questions, it now appears, were not simply aye, or 
no, as in the case of the second series ; and as a reason for 
directing the Committee to receive none but the most defi- 
nite and precise replies, it was publicly declared, on the floor 
of Presbytery, that there had been " enough of explanations 
in former days, and that now something was required of Mr. 
Clapp which required no explanation." When the aforesaid 
Committee made their final report, they presented such a se- 
ries of questions, and it is concerning them that Mr. Clapp 
has asserted that he gave them with full explanations. 

But let us suppose that Mr. Clapp held conversations with 
the Committee of conference, which they neglected faithfully 
to report to Presbytery, (a neglect, in which, as has already 
been seen, Mr. Clapp acquiesced,) were these conversations 
such as to qualify the sense in which he signed the questions, 
so as materially to affect the signification ? It is in evidence 
from the chairman of the said Committee, that he had ex- 
pressed no sentiments to them inconsistent with the obvious 
meaning embraced in the interrogatories. 

It remains only to ask, why should the accused be so 
anxious to make it be believed by others that the plain and 
obvious sense conveyed by these questions was not the sense 
in which he had signed them ? Was there an ambiguity in 
the terms, which was calculated to impose error upon the 
Presbytery under the guise of truth? If so, he is convicted 
of the grossest disingenuousness. The language is apparently 
too simple to need interpretation ; and in such an important 
crisis, if it were fitted in any degree to leave even an errone- 
ous impression of the real sentiments he held, an honest man 
would rather have suffered torture than have put his affirma- 
tive signature to them. Why then his anxiety to show that 
he signed these questions with qualifications ? Is it not that 
there is a manifest discrepancy between the views embraced 
in these direct and unambiguous interrogatories, and the views 



369 



which Mr. Clapp has elsewhere preached and practised. 
There is but one inference to be drawn from this fact, and it 
is this, — that there has been upon his part a lamentable want 
of that directness and honesty in this transaction which should 
always characterize professed preachers of truth. 

It is impossible, therefore, for the Presbytery to suppose, 
that when the accused asserted that he had signed the afore- 
said questions with explanations, he believed what he had as- 
serted. Painful as it is to their feelings, the principles of jus- 
tice and truth constrain them to pronounce him guilty of de- 
liberate and intentional falsehood. 

The fifth specification was therefore sustained. 

6. Under the sixth specification, he was charged with false- 
hood in declaring that the statements in the pastoral letter 
sent by Presbytery to the 1st Presbyterian church in New 
Orleans, was false in detail and in toto. 

It appeared in evidence that he had made the declaration 
charged as false : that he had pronounced the document false, 
base, and contemptible : that the statements in it were false, 
and Presbytery would find it so : that it was false that he had 
subscribed the Confession of Faith : that the statement that he 
belonged to the Mississippi Presbytery was false. 

It also appeared in evidence, that these allegations were 
made publicly. Could Mr. Clapp have believed them when 
he uttered them ? It appeared that he was under the influ- 
ence of very excited feelings when he uttered them. But that 
circumstance rather aggravates the offence thus committed 
by a religious instructor, before the members of the church to 
which he ministered, assembled to hear a pastoral letter read. 
Nevertheless, the Presbytery will admit that his excited feel- 
ings may have produced some confusion of mind and rash 
declarations. But they cannot conceive how he could have 
been so much excited, as to have believed that the pastoral 
letter (a document of Presbytery) was false in detail and in 
toto : how he could have been so much excited, as to have 
forgotten that he ever performed so solemn an act as that of 
adopting the Confession of Faith : how he could have been 
so much excited, as to have forgotten that he had belonged 



370 



to the Mississippi Presbytery. Besides all this, after the afore- 
said excitement was over, he has deliberately asserted that 
the pastoral letter contained false statements, and that Pres- 
bytery would find it so. 

In his defence, liberty was granted to him to show, if he 
were able, that any of its statements were false. But he ut- 
terly failed in the attempt. He confined his remarks almost 
entirely to the statement, " that many free and particular con- 
versations were held with him in 1829, by some of the mem- 
bers of Presbytery." He remarked that if these conversa- 
tions were held with him, he had forgotten it. He had no 
recollection on the subject, and therefore disbelieved that they 
were held . 

It was decided unanimously, that the sixth specification be 
sustained. 

The Presbytery having sustained all the specifications under 
the second charge, except the fourth, decided unanimously 
that the accused is found guilty of immoral and unchristian 
conduct. 

Both the charges under which Mr. Glapp was arraigned, 
have been thus fully sustained. The guilt of avowing and 
teaching doctrines inconsistent with the system of doctrines 
which he had voluntarily adopted, and the guilt of slander and 
falsehood, seemed to require the heaviest penalty existing in 
our ecclesiastical court. But inasmuch as the Presbytery has 
pursued a kind and forbearing, although a firm and decided 
course, throughout this difficult and trying business, they were 
anxious not to depart from it in any respect in the conclusion. 
If he were suspended until satisfactory reasons were offered 
for his restoration, the exercise of ministerial functions would 
be as fully forbidden as if they had proceeded to immediate 
deposition : while, at the same time, encouragement to repent- 
ance would be presented by the hope of ultimate restoration. 
Hence they decided that he be suspended. 

They now leave the wisdom and justice of this decision to 
the sanction of an overruling Providence. Conscious of no 
motive but the preservation of the " truth, unity, and purity" 
of the church of Christ, they are little concerned with the 



371 

opprobrious imputations which have already been cast upon 
themselves. For the mischiefs which have grown, and may 
yet proceed from this unhappy source, they do not hold them- 
selves responsible. For themselves, they have no fears and 
no regrets. If earnest and heartfelt supplication at the throne 
of grace, in behalf of their erring brother — if forbearance, long 
forbearance, tenderness, and Christian courtesy, could have 
effected in any other way the settlement of this, the only dis- 
turbance which has ever interrupted the harmony of this Pres- 
bytery, it would long since have been settled. They have 
had every motive to desire such an issue, as would have con- 
tinued in their connexion an individual whose talents are such 
as to furnish him with distinguished capabilities of usefulness. 
But their hopes and desires have been disappointed. They 
are much concerned, that from misapprehension, prejudice, 
perversion, or ignorance, " the way of truth will be evil spoken 
of" on this account. " It must needs be that offences come, 
hut woe to those by whom the offence cometh." 

To God and the Church they commit their decision. 

JOHN H. VANCOURT, Moderator, 
B. CHASE, Clerk, 

Adjourned till to-morrow morning at 9 o'clock. Concluded 
with prayer. 

Thursday, 9 o^clock, A. M. 

Met according to adjournment, and opened with prayer. 

The Presbytery being informed that Theodore Clapp had 
disregarded his sentence of suspension by publicly preaching 
in the city of Natchez, appointed a Committee to prepare 
a minute recommending what measures should be taken in 
relation to it. The Rev. Messrs. Smylie and Hagaman were 
appointed that Committee. 

Resolved, to have a recess until 3 o'clock P. M. 

After recess, resumed business. The Committee appointed 
to prepare a minute in relation to Mr. Clapp's contemptuous 
disregard of his sentence of suspension, submitted the follow- 
ing, which was accepted and adopted, viz ; 

49 



372 



Whereas Theodore Clapp was suspended on the 22d of 
December last from the office of the Gospel ministry, on the 
charges of error in doctrine and deportment ; and whereas 
it is a matter of public notoriety, that on the night of the fol- 
lowing day, said Theodore Clapp did preach in the Methodist 
Episcopal church at Natchez, in the audience of a congrega- 
tion, in contempt of the sentence of this Presbytery ; there- 
fore 

Resolved, that said Theodore Clapp be, and he is hereby 
deposed from the office of the Gospel ministry. 

Resolved, that the clerk be directed to forward without de- 
lay to Theodore Clapp, a. cupy of the above preamble and 
resolution. 

Resolved, that it be the duty of the clerk to notify the ses- 
sion of the first Presbyterian church in New Orleans, that on 
the 22d ultimo, Theodore Clapp was suspended for errors in 
doctrine and deportment : and that on this 10th day of Ja- 
nuary, 1833, he was deposed from the office of the Gospel 
ministry for contemptuous disregard of the decision of the 
Presbytery. 

Resolved, that the Rev. J. H. Vancourt and William C. 
Blair be a Committee to superintend the publication of the 
decision of the Presbytery, and the reasons of that decision, 
in the case of Theodore Clapp. 

JOHN H. VANCOURT, Moderator. 
BENJAMIN CHASE, Clerk. 

Pine Grove, Amity County, Miss. April 1st, 1833. 
I, James Smylie, stated clerk of the Mississippi Presbytery, 
do certify, that the above, with the interlineations and marginal 
references in mine and Mr. Frederick B. M'Nair's hand-wri- 
ting, is a true copy* from the records, of every thing therein 
having reference to the trial, suspension, and deposition of 
Theodore Clapp. 

JAMES SMYLIE, Stated Clerk. 

* The stated clerk was not particular in examining the punctuation of the 
'"■above transcript. 



373 



" New Orleans, February \bth t 183L 
" To the Rev. George Potts, Natchez. 

" Dear Sir. — Will you do me the favour to present the 
following petition to the next meeting of the Presbytery. 

" To the Mississippi Presbytery. 

" Gentlemen, (and may I not add) very dear brethren in 
Christ Jesus, our Lord. — Believing that there are some errors 
of importance in the proceedings concerning my dismission 
from your body last April, I respectfully pray you to refer the 
record of those proceedings to the General Assembly of the 
Presbyterian church in the United States of America, which, 
it is expected, will meet in Philadelphia next May, for their 
examination, and approval or disapproval. 

" Your very affectionate brother in Christ, 

"THEODORE CLAPP." 

" In my former letters to you, I have stated the reasons for 
the belief mentioned in the above petition. If there are any 
errors in your proceedings, they belong, of course, to the class 
named unintentional. My petition was a simple intelligible 
thing. If my sentiments or conduct forbade your granting it, 
then it was your solemn duty, as an ecclesiastical judicatory, 
to commence process against me, and to have brought it to a 
regular close. 

" Each member of your body is entitled to a dismission and 
accompanying recommendation as a minister of the Gospel in 
good standing, who has not been, on trial, convicted of anti- 
christian opinions or conduct. Without such conviction, you 
have no right to censure, admonish, depose, or excommuni- 
cate one of your brethren ; you have no right to deprive him 
of any of his clerical privileges or functions. 

" Such seem to me to be self-evident, incontrovertible prin- 
ciples in your constitution or form of church government ; yet 
my views may be erroneous. Infallibility is the prerogative 
of God only. Since we disagree, let the concentrated wisdom 
of the Presbyterian church decide. 

" Mr. Smylie, the last time I saw him, assured me, that in 



374 

Ms opinion the Presbytery would be pleased to grant my re- 
quest. On sabbath last we had a large meeting with reference 
to the sabbath schools in the valley of the Mississippi. Seve- 
ral addresses were made. Subscriptions and contributions 
amounted to $1050, a greater amount than was ever before 
raised in our church, at one meeting, for the cause of Christ ; 
yet this is small for so rich a place. I do not know that we 
are much behind our sister churches in the article of giving 
money ; but as to orthodoxy, what a falling off, as some would 
have it. I think we are advancing in orthodoxy ; female 
gossip and scandal to the contrary notwithstanding. 

" Your friend, 

"T. CLAPP. 

" My sincere respects to Mrs. Potts." 

I certify that the above is a true copy of a letter ; although 
not on record, yet it is on file. 

JAMES SMYLIE, 
Stated Clerk, Mississippi Presbytery. 

April 1st, 1833. 



THE END. 



ERRATUM. 



In a few copies, a mistake has inadvertently passed : — viz. on 
page 62, the words governor Morris should have been Governeur 
Morris. 



* ***** * *£&S 






• 4^ 











« .. . « 



• V 




0^ *0 4 




"of 





O. * Q „ o * *0 ^Jp, a^* Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process, 

• • / C* (y » < * <»* ^> \j* « * Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 

* Treatment Date: June 2006 



*M PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 



« » * 4 *> ^ * •* • * G O *e Cranberry Township, PA 16066 

^ 0*1% ^ 0* (724J779- ? 111 y 




\0 V 1 . - v 



V 



FEB 82 



INDIAN A 46962 J ^ '7*0$*?% 4$> °* V ^%^* ^ <V ^ 



